Appendix — Federal Trade Commission v. Texaco Inc.

Supreme Court brief1968

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Dilieect

” Direst P

Direct

Joseph C. Arey:

J ;. Direct

: . Redirect

: Harold A. Gehrke:

, ‘Volume mR

SRP SOMERSET HSE RESEEHEHESEEES HE SEEESEEEE ESS

eeee

See Meee RE RO EEE E REESE SESH EE HESEEEETESESEEEEE EET ESS

SPSS SE HEE EEE EEEEEEEEEEHE SES ES ETE SES ESSE ERE EES

meee eee E SHEEP ESE SHEHESESEEEESEEEEEEEEESE ES MEOS

POR UUPEECEESSOCOSCSOSOOOCOCSOS CECE)

"JA 695

SERS ee HHH HE EES EMESESET EEE SESE ESE SESE ESS

SPORE H SHEE HEH ESTE EH ESE EES SES ES ESTE T EE EEEEEE

Jim Abernethy:

gi «(i IRR ee

NE silssonpstectieniescelinicions Siasniniiaiibcbisingn

2 Direct ......... in iesonpale i casbitiasninnaie

%y ee

Direct - SAO

AMES ee? Te CUES Paras Nowe

I hac Se ted

aE EL lS OOS x mete

| Theodore H. Shift, a oe

ET ET CF: y 3

er Liswiatoan Tie, 908

- re os JA 743, JA 765

- Cross .......:........ paiaeencaceasees JA 747, JA 766

I re JA 748

IEE iets siuccupinincdinpalinioniaiiacooiiatacnedss JA 749

a a JA 764

Direot ee siscshnieintsicasionsiidaeR iets JA 767

ERRAER aN “SEN Nas een ene NSN Cae -.. JA 776

1? ¢

Volumes I and IT |

William E. McDaniel?

SORE an nenareninc ce eae

MII -.. .snnswnsannevonemamniteh oclucouses eat

Direct iaeiatihaseiinsinsudssieilice cdc

Direct Nici ioe esas ere ae

PEE

PEP.

_ Volume II

‘PAGE

Ted Olsen: |

a SERN ees en. Sy JA 884

REISS Pea REO Te JA 893

f EES AERO SONNE Ua ED JA 897

MIE iain eacesnsSvcchieildimersunacsbae la JA 899

_ Al Scoville:

RRS NRC ES eee JA 899

_____ CERRO eR Sete JA 904

Percy L: Kanago: be Sa

___ IMRAN (0p HTS eR JA 909

Ic isisiectstrnescnapeicnesaiete Teel JA 932

Mannie O. Hansen:

MND: sicccinttis cecerclceinanstesctoneicactiieeiads JA 913

: SE I Re Sieh JA 936

| an ae Pe JA 938

Lawrence B. Taylor: | ae Mee

; Direct = wee ceeeeeesseepeceaeerewns WEsscoapee} ~ JA 924

Sos. AMI Shpncrvstonecn anny Sane oonesibitti dines ~ JA 939 ©

re: Direct ........ anieteinapiiaecds h beets nein JA 942

| a PAGE

W. E. Smith |

R EEN OER RS. SP ee 11! 38 Ere JA 1063

SIE rere REN REE EDTA- hsco ate JA 1070

- Redirect ....:...”......... Laeoie ‘..J3A1074, JA 1076

BID ccccnccidacstnspsieceustyat eee meas, JA 1075

John Morgan Hussong: . |

Direct. ..:...:... ARTEMIS 8 5 his Be JA 1076

RIND: > seiAipsslstvcsasiaipicaiiens pe eA IE JA 1080

Elmer W. Johnson |

af RCE I ek JA 1081

| RI sis sicarnsinserstescaseaauuactiee JA 1084

Lee Barton |

; Nena re ro : JA 1085

; RRR ere eet oT JA 1092

v » x

John W. Green

MII wsinccernsacsshashaiieisoucs stale cman JA 1093

DE sckissihlibie cinickegce 4 nie a ~ JA 1097

K. B. Roberts \

at 6 IE ee Sa scnesactaditanes JA 1099

: NITE ~ ssscxssovescconecsterpscancssosusbachieienlock| ‘JA 1113

* William E. Childress: ” 2a

Gn eS ee JA 1123

RIAs aN eae hs Ree isos - JA 1128

| Beagan Ferguson, Jr.: ae Hee

nee .. JA 1128

* PAGE

C. T. Fitts: : |

AF SEI: siisindincntnineinicinbhlsisinaiin MRAM co JA 1137

____ ERE ago RP A JA 1142

Donald E. La Garde:

EE ATR. © HRD JA 1146

SE DRA EOR OER Ts JA 1148

Keller F. Melton: | |

ad 2 RRRRSEL Saat seer art Ae JA 1153

Harvey G. Talley> 3 ooo ee

| FRI. osiepset ne scncorintnnascackaten titaiitbog dace JA 1160 .

@oess ...........: sdiecvaleiibiitidaiaidaiicuniuiapeiniagis JA 1168 |

| SE tenniitiennatisdnitiaisaid JA 1172, JA 1175 ©

i wcebhilsibibseces Qa Mane

George R. Boyd: ; © sexl

icicles besonmesddblithibehensts JA 1176

Cross ereee Frecee Feseecsceeeceseroosoedt sees aatadaal JA 1479

OD isnsssccsnnsssisinessssesientesintbcsaseibcst JA. 1183

John D. Hulme

SRE ae chad JA 1184

NI aaa seconesoseninsvveeceresvennspesscstentnotic JA 1189

Sam B. Riddick: ‘| , i Be

_ Direct ........ binanneiiaaatancensailtll FELON: See JA 1192

William Russell Bridges: : 3 j

‘i eae prossbeccosccones enaecees cesaenssscbocece JA 1194

See et, See JA 1198:

: Redirect iniaeiieti FRC SETS To Oe JA 1202

Earl Martin Gause: : wee ae 5 eS

PEACE: RETR TCO ODS a OT MOE JA 1202

Volume It

PAGE

Richard Elias Tidwell: oe sa

| SR TE erie a JA 1208

ee JA 1215

John D. Scott:

Directs ....ece.: Sop SCAONE eS CO JA 1218

Ug Sits sscnscstionntonoossnsiiessiistblncoedonoes JA 1230

SETTER NN a EDS aD PD JA 1236

FOOD sscossecsecsvssesseninesonseverbeieustasine JA 1287

— rae ° | |

ig AE emcmennere JA 1287

EN Ae SN EC RO Sr et JA 1241

Guy R. Sinclair:

Sr ek ae RECT JA 1243

Claude M. Chambers: |

| i See sicininsntitsliiccnne ls Mae

H. Arpin Koehler: a bats |

ne EERE ear eeioenees JA 1249

. OID acrecccccevcns ate ace ee bhisés JA 1263

Abe'Goldstein: 7

: 4 Direct ,cocssceoococcooocooocs teeresereeseeeee epeséoerceens JA 1266

A eae ee aa wedbbtes - JA 1268

EE Nee | 0.8 RN JA 1271

. ES JA 1272

William B. Price:

SIE -secicctisistnnbingeaiesspiipeaiigesst IO bs a, JA 1272

MD Ki: isicoveccticineneasonesenvopncd BAAD emece JA 1276

32%

Folmeé..11

; | PAGE

C.H. Avery: |

Se = NEE TS : JA 1277

b.°% ‘ Cross. Peidkecsmmidasnbiatderciddniaccnia Secdcccece JA 1281

4 I ipesnncsnnonsnipsisansibicnabeinineiegnie JA 1281

Garland T. Duke:

Sc Re Ae ae JA 1282

i _ ce OORSRAT OED JA 1284

WEIN scivssecinctecsseienisseinadsiasensesedsteddleeial JA 1285

' Guy Walter Scott: : | ees :

a RR Seeeeenere Babbtielbesese JA 1286

Ne JA 1292

FTES Zee wa O JA 1351

I - Sac asiicssihisilicineehstete eeiieemiineibaiiiea ee JA 1360

SE sorsisetfobndireaiandidibinbiel JA 1366, JA 1369

I siotstiensscigiteiininnconehdiaiagacuamti JA 1367

Edward J. Midden: Sent °

Direct ........ ssinbiseiuseendiiitniianmmaimall cc JA. 1369

Cross obeccccceeioppeoscccesocsscosecesoessoapesgesescees JA 1378

PIII. ciinictscabsesnstamssosteniinincnspnandtotaasibaaes JA 1383

RINT -- caicnsnsenssfaccnentinapcuncisisaptiabsiiesdadbits JA 1384

H. E. Smiley

IN ieicealiviiepiienilconncsetapihietlapaegitidlathiseati lias JA 1385

ANS ee | ee JA 1394

|, a Te TST! § Ta JA 1404

Pa 7 . PAGE

‘William V. Brooks: bear | .

I aitiisia adil aasdlateiealsdalninnciabsi NG Anni JA 1405

Norman L. Jacobson: |

Ross Rittenhouse: . ;

ei: °° ee © a SA 1485

‘XVII f°

‘ Volume IT ih,

eee er Page

Stanton Swank: gt sD fat

MITE siisitnsisiceicsiienitiiniieaciaieialal jecosteonree TA 1500 {

MID scsi csussonsnichinbiieialeammiul . JA 15075.)

' Herbert Bolte: ee mh /

EET accent posessebecvocees Oi ABIO

sg NEED. accennsatishdiilisciecesss aaa Msies JA.1515

Joseph Novak, Jr: =. y uf

eT eS See h 7JA 1519

Cross. ........ slilhunaisigensseniciecdinssMimiaMadicuie JA 1526

Lawrence Starr: i r

MERSIN SS Ty JA 1528

ESSER SR ae eee JA 1538

Redirect ............ Movontncvssectsistbditidilccecs JA 1541

s a

Fred Opocensky ’ ;

A tic ite I 28 JA 1542

ID sesistiibdpuesivepsesenmeininennnaeatilailiian Moses. JA 1548

Roger Wilson, Jr.: | :

SIIID, sepsevesetivsinebinsennshbtmnecemnslilae Roads JA 1555

I SAEs eA ecies JA: 1559

Paul B. Hicks: ) |

TRS ESAT vada JA 1560, JA 2167

D: ccxrssiihdiditnnatns sesssseeernesseee DA 109, JA 2173 -

_ Redirect ............ soipenhnutnitiiandinaae « JA 2177

John Nemec: mf

| EO svirionertbilliclars: Mil Me

. XVIII

Volume IT e

John A..McGuire: <2 ratenies *

a | Direct. ...........: es plannanennsesiiaiditichlehannise JA 1585

©, RII canning seegeccscrncnccssnnnennsnsnensssiosivenne GA 1592

Patrick Delle Grazie: . | ‘ hk

» ARIE acodenisienneiivtammanmeseiantiibitinnenn a ae

REGIE a lesnsnscssessorerorrenensinnnocicne “eee JA 1604

John E.Roessner, - ae on ie

i sansiypesienninsinnnnnamnanetbnaeneneitsiihciiaimesen JA 1608.

GHOGE -\-....ngenssorsscsenssssoneresnsegsonsisenisoensnsees JA 1618

Stanley Grelicki: ets - |

VF; Direct ..........+. srsnsinnnanninnalannennbinddahiibabncivas JA 1620

a. ss ennenenerens ipinianensnieia oT Te JA 1643

FI, .nectageeesscesnsengpepnssiicien tobias . JA 1654

Clayton Jackman: an |

IIE cicipecaneseang vricnsecbenseiasibe billets JA 1655

III sncnsicsvennssacieonsion miniananniied dcidchielienes JA 1659

Loy Spradling | st |

: TIBI, occcsesnsssnsee decstaedinanstnnsendithirhisichecans JA 1659

SONI. nessssverriornns vane pnpnipnettliltiiaahaoie JA 1665

Fred Pryor: © | is

| __ in RII valacehaninnetsheenietnsemennennnissomninscicaiealcal JA 1666

‘ EO « nciciamsipnvnnseeanpensmnalia Sowriweie OA 1673

Pa: scansesonesennsassssbeecs .. JA 1712

aoe 9 ote.

" 5 MEE cnet iaiinieennetiininianiine . JA 1675 ©

CLOSE eran ceresessesesseserrsnsnsterrinsnsersieneel JA 1681

| 2x :

Volumes II ana III

| | PAGE.

Paul L. Mayers: ; | + ,

e 2 FT -sn0ncrninsnsneenicessstnnatassnaceenintiiiocdas JA 1683

©. MI «cic cnessennenies stdesseecnsed Reoscttcudese + ‘JA 1689

Redirect ............¢.... siihdiaajantlacionsiahbananie ti ' JA 1691

Becross ............! Ay cscereeeeeeeeneeceneenseaneten JA 1692

‘Ta . Volume III

Lowell L. Bates: ore gs

; ne siiianaiitiewetenniinnntiiaa Son ae JA 1693

SE -dneinnsenicinsadinninesiininnenniisdieiindgtniiel JA 1698

FD iscssnnstimnennvinsmiinrinsnnatsisbaistc .. JA 1702

Dale Retke: |

III = scxiusissusssansisseniinnaiatilaustimnntAMO ts JA 1703

Aa Ser ase Stee eed JA 1709

BI scvssnosiasinisitesamienainssinasnnsaiecaae aes JA 1711

Gordon, B. Patterson: = 4 i

cE E = ichhiccewn. OA 1TIB

NSTI iabiotseshaipenmaa candela JA.1720

Redirect dinilahsecinniohihabidhapabeeaiiia a aeaae JA 1723

Arvid F. Tubbs: . +

aia JA 1723

I iagieenpienncmrninnunieelaatisiiabichccnetisions JA 1730

Raymond Holm: . ‘ oS oo: !

Direct ......... siemcncaaiel Dassnnbitidckabonan SA 1732

Cross ........... sienivhialiuaca niente : JA 1739

‘Colley Burnett: " | te | 2 i

| s SIO onesciBsndscsenecesnssticscasspas pena 35 JA -1740

II ‘sntennoeennsnsnnstsnsnitssnisniaaeniitaeaiiesied JA 1749

. ae : . ° “~ A -

Mervin A. Hummel: - * viet Ih yas.

7 IO on sscsssvennseorennnsssssertssosnisSibinlssnine JA‘1750 »

‘_x

. Volume III |

” PAGE

James L Hendrickson:

= SEE jaiesilaesiienranieitennvbannevnnaeileel bblaneenss JA 1769

Cross Sa SEE OR ERO Ee Sc a JA 1777

Howard ihe:

Direct - ETE Ser Oe en oe el ee JA. 1780

Cross ......... Sasi Utila Avicenna in sisal JA 1789 °

Ee Se eae avsanseneabiannbonboid JA 1792

II. ositisnpncnsnsnsysis tenenpenied heleiipidcinanes JA 1793.

Curtis Toothmea: . a 7 -

NR aca JA 1793, JA1799_ -

ERs Se es JA 1799 -

Cross CED sia AEE ONOEE ME MOTT 7 Alok JA 1801

Vincent +: Onno ;

Direct . iaesaiisaaahel iuiehaniliaabiihc Sista eiiiptiints JA 1805

I sinh a eens ae JA 1812

III ocsnvasiviniaierinenaneinnnanalidibdiiadiabigess JA 1815

James F'. McCue: | | fata

BI nesvnsccvscnnnesnsesnvursonosanscsaveconnesseess JA 1815

a a elas JA 1818

William Clyde Sizemore

SEE TEE eee JA 1821.

Ee ee ae en eS JA. 1828

id lel ccasideantbiaineolasons JA 1831

ea eel NE tase - JA-1832

Charles T. r. Llewellyn:

s Direct ........ eiinniataenitaiiniitentibtbiithleins. JA 1833

ERIE Seno eee Tr ne JA 1838

Ray V. Bailey

ETE LE HER Vet ee JA“1845

| * —xXI

x Volume III ;

PAGE

Almon G. Lane ee |

| Direct ooo .csceeecseceeseeeeeeenes A 1859, JA 1863

ce RSE 1 ree eodbbines ..... JA 1863

Cross seeeeeees PE Sle See sscbeviepkakannieeen « JA 1866 .

RS i a taal JA 1869, JA 1870

| eC -casensannetilis vesesenin JA 1869.

R. Leo Leonard: ; | 5: Sk?

____ REE RD OT OUT FF fesse: | JA 1870.

| See Se JA 1873

Harold Crawford: | . fe abet ee at

bo cscsiessisnsies SES PTS ae - JA 1875

i scteipnicnasseneititedaciti lassie ' JA 1882

Arthur Neufeld: - | Cae

ee a> nee JA 1884

ms JA 1892

| I i. sass seehnpbsicateanesenmeslttih JA 1895

Max Edward Mandell |

EE Ee eT oe” ON JA 1896

No st cnselkenwenpeinnanssons JA 1901

Redirect OTE Tee a EN ST OT JA 1903

A. James De Ambra: > | |

: nC

Cross ...... EES Rae ND SE JA 1911

Pierce N. Johnston: n ae

| EE ener a JA 1915

Ce, eet e+ ee JA 1920

; Volume. HI

PAGE

Burney Barker: . Weitk

Direct. ........ ic paeien werumme <2 tees JA 1932

Cross atthastaiaddeianmnictaimavenanaiictonnele oe! Se

Milton Ellington:

MII secksniitsicicinnsanvpiosneninonsdibdigaisdilb ales JA 1941

IE: iiss Ni tia siuathilaipcleslesndieselaebicaomenaiene JA 1944

Alfred:A. Franklin: eae

cea = eee sins inaetabons JA. 1945

oe Cross... s ieeueaiiaa naa JA 1949

Lee R. Moss, Jr.: rae ? :

: : EEE, one nee wae ee JA 1952

REE rene menrenre ce snecomrie JA 1959

SII. csnunbickinensaaseeuanianaaiouae JA 1966

OID csstnysscccasneisiseniobeinccessitecaiabtoamedsns JA 1967

O'Neal Embry: ote :

RRS — te ANU ENNEN RN Nae oer aT JA 1969.

RII ccsnsiattaneveanssionntbtaee Hie Ee aes JA 1974

| © Bedirect 1... .sccsesestsesstesssseeesteeniassssees | JA 1978

P. K. Conner: ~~

la are Seen Re JA 1979

. Cross povecccecepeccccassocensoeeesooecese Sceseevascoccess JA 1984

EE SEs ae JA 1986

C. T. Fitts:

i RII caisthscansesesospeenainicindtutasecaresicile eels JA 1986

BIE oh Nd pchcasidathuncreeddishembessapidbederestaden JA 1995

I isuitishisncsassesnrcinsnbanssadieannainn JA 2006

E. L. Patton: |

| a4 TI isssjsnessysovsssvvansovensosseelibocbion hess JA 2007

Redirect. ................ sin eeieae JA 2031, JA 2034

RIED ssc.ecssseseasiisimiakenssanebidl JA 2033, JA 2035

xxXIII

Volume. III |

. ee PaGE

B, C. Chiles ) ees

EE Seen Deas fT 2 .-. JA: 2036

RIE spssetioincncidesinielainppiacssasaisAiiiiietas JA 2040

Redirect ......:... srrvremnevasicitee DAS ait Tw | JA 2042

F. H. Worsham =

AOC Libeect JA 2042

ESTES, aM ton Pk ae JA 2047

SEER Snare Ae Pees JA 2049

SR ae eRe cee enaarties ss JA 2050

Kenneth Heth .

EES eM AEE So er JA 2050

ERA anaes ‘JA 2057

RRR Tones ANuere o' ) cl ae JA 2061

Charles W. Moore:. |

SID ssiciniasinsisnsisiansissscianabiaeatea el. JA 2061

Cross sais adiailihiniadensiiiddiccuaee alr tos JA 2067

Orville L. Jernigan:

A Direct FS RE oi ee Oe Linsiuistiaehe ices JA 2069

John McGahey: ae | eee seen Stee ae

ee ae |e

Cross ......... CAE A ME NEE TS wee’, SA 2083 *

| RA eee Pe JA: 2086, JA 2087

ee SR RON Ra Do eh JA

L. H. Daniel ie

. i RTE RNIN SM JA 2087

SII ate eS ten ene JA 2093

ee sea escnnsaseibuaencincecias gisele JA 2099

Charles B. Swann: ‘he

PE ianiieial Gat lan Seen JA. 2099

A eas area Dep pen Re AT Te JA 2104

XXIV

Volume III ae

. J P«GE

Charles Etibanks: PA i ee

pli entiniln JA 2106

Sea cidlosiishecsinsivesccophapi haniiaodes JA 2112

ee, | EER JA 2114

A.L. McAnally: /—

‘ SE cen eR see Aa JA 2114

SUIT iis. sociia:ssieditesnanestinbansonetasscoliadslialote ‘JA 2120

H. Helmcamp a

SII i «sis sssusisnnistsanigialatnentabusiaiciesbohioida JA-2123

REE ne morris <n) JA 2126

K. BR. Roberts

OE RTL JA 2129, JA 2138

IIc: cicccaiaacsusudssiricssdiantbamssanaemamian JA 2136

BN iccectsniiccncngi is sasegabindeiaeecd bball JA 2149

BI: scicsccniscosibcnadiesdiuooeeaebasies JA 2153

John T. Bolger: .— | | |

Ci: (iC Ditties JA 2155

PI ioncicseeciegdiasilannctencusiathcisinsiaateeGiniebeas JA 2159

A. G. Russell: . Sntée

RE Re a eee meet: Lek OK . JA 2161

RII i: <scsccsibiccacinsresisdincelipetebeemabedbot JA 2165

OE EEL JA 2166

H. L. Cain:

| SAIN RCH reeenenea eon Mee JA 2177

BEIT ivscnncniciakalecondileneinbaiegeibanetala tennis JA 2189

John Killips

FE ER een Re EC A JA 2191

ie |

DB. Underhill: | : es

oo, ETE SARI ITT AO JA 2210 ©

SN Wi ctstandeeiniumcsiatbedsntas tae soie JA 2221

W. B. Wes

) EA ae MOTE RE oI JA 2223

i sslehpnetsinsepieatedtichonnigusishaeouctiaae JA 2233

Reagan Ferguson, ; ae | AS

: I Sitti ke eee ‘JA 2235

EE TER eae JA 2242

| ERE a Oe JA 2243

George H. Glenn: :

CS PRED EEEL SEee JA 2243

bso eae, he A

I shila cetesckenses [nv<icsstadesibahtieicinamaielas JA 2266

Elihu Madison | | :

oo EIN, JA 2269, JA 2301

TO lc ‘ JA 2287

Theodore N. Beckman: ae y

NE ith tichiceessaivndnenistiincctashinadidaaosn uk -JA 2308

eS ERE oe!

I Siiihasicaciadcacaitecceceate JA 2326, JA 2330

| - JA 2332, JA 2336

I acsenconvvrnssersvtoescsemserecssossepisesiann A

Voir Dire ............ JA 2231, JA 2334, JA 2340

PAGE

XXVIII

Volume IV

: pags

ee. ene eee ra a JAX 96

RS As seticstls a eae JAX 97

|S ces Re eee JAX 98

EER Re aL _ JAX. 99

REE ee Meer ehes eee en ‘JAX 100

Oc ccaeiuielne JAX 101

OTS Rp acine eee Wear beers acer JAX 102

Oe NE cea taser REL Re oacen neo JAX 103

OTE RRR ced oan NRO Cn JAX 104

ee en JAX 105

SEED Ee OL ene EE et OREO RT ES JAX 106

ar a aa JAX 107

I cies isistinsnscntpeervesstentonesnsstneasossonaneennmntnndoncnrng JAX 108

a ee aaa ampepaneniaapelilein JAX 109

OSE ORR tg tate tae eo ae ERE JAX 110

te ee eer JAX 111

| SE ae oe ON ERE RATER toa RE JAX 112

TS Ee RE IN ene JAX 113

ec iclaicsoenan PRED i eacrean MrIode sere sete ee JAX 114

SC ACE EN BORIC ION etree JAX 115

OE aon R eRe een JAX 116

Ee anes a a NC A HEED JAX 117

Ee. SOR MOLT Se PNA “JAX 118 |

| Ne ee JAX T19 -

X4NXI

Votume IV

Re . PAGS.

SR 8 RR SOTO Re Te es . JAX 120

i oe yaa JAX 121

| RN SEE ae MOREE 5a moO EER JAX 122

Oi oo asics acme JAX 123

EER 2 OE EPR Dm er JAX 124

ee ee JAX 125

ek 6 eee a JAX 126.

Oe dl Reena eter ter ate Nene: JAX 127

NRG fn he eee JAX 128

a ee ee ‘JAX 129

Ea ee ee Aa ERE IN JAX180

Od CRD eRe rc a ‘JAX 131

Ee ERR esa ORE ae WAT ints at FS 5 JAX 132

ES ROO em TORTE Meo te sna OE JAX 133

EF ERA MRR CRS A eRe ‘JAX 134

Re os Ra ee JAX"135

Se Oo eho) We Tienes JAX 136

NE Fao arco nme Sater ME JAX. 137

IE aka... ccsnsius caiisapianisuspeanilacastlasohinicualaamnamdaia :.. JAX 188

ae RSE eee ee | vasulen oer JAX 139

AOR DE AS ATE JAX 140

Biss arses ectlleonenaneneusianis JAX 141

“Dy 0 alee ieciee acta JAX 142

XXXL

Volume IV

| PaGs

SEER eee ‘JAX 168

SESE en, JAX 169

ORE RS JAX 170

| SE AO i caiels JAX 171

a JAX 172

TN siibiemnant JAX 173

aa id sameness JAX 174

cit cnccusssaneassnasimmtonstesnanastiebaioecoioacss JAX 175

TAREE a Cea JAX 176

i JAX 177

PEAS na ale ce eee JAX 178

A SAR Eee cane ree A JAX 179

BP atu eis a JAX 180

SERS GRARRE Se NAD Seek OAM ge JAX 181

Eee eI JAX 182

Ii psncscnscbesepenrernerrancearoen Reet eae 2. JAX 183

RENE RIN Ae a eet = OEY JAX 184

Sie a ie alae, JAX 185

Rie ene eats Semana Ue ,.. JAX 186

NE RS ea eee RE SE (.. JAX 187

ised A oeicetons, ctedate destin JAX: 188

i cso Wi ada uc eded shine JAX 189

i dt JAX 190

Xxxv

Volume IV “eve

, _—

ER Pe att Ree SL JAX 216

RE EEE RE JAX 217

Ibi: cssnsiciprinstcediinecoiensincaaliiaaanalmena: » JAX 218

EA. ncscsciacdaaaacanaladdiaeananiieeets JAX 219

BI Sh hss. ceacrnsssescicactaleiiuineislimeameanceliepuintenoniaae JAX 220

NER te ee iain JAX 221

A cnscisisoserineuiesicaeiiiactsvlamasaueniinn JAX 222

TE cikcehtacsissenneqeunpaiintionetninnnaiiuiitinantiviauaenietaiins - JAX 223

SS Se RO Slat ON JAX 224

AA EAR MEO ee a a DR at JAX 225

ee JAX 226

5A ER LN aE EE JAX 227

A ES I ET NT siionieintoliat JAX 228

GOW liclisversesessreeosencsslptovio’ iene JAX 229

WI £2... oc csscsnemmetclcomapsisilibiosonieinielllaa JAX 230

IETF 1,, os ssdsdsouetseninnimitnstavcisabipiicididioondaetiiaa JAX 231

EE RE Ee OS 2 JAX 232

RE SIRO LOTR BAO SARS NON JAX 233

FR OD eR Ee A ts JAX 234

ee *<......... sijuleieitanideait aaabancaial JAX 235

hd siscasiiniitaenaeinamiaiianies pinto JAX 236

UU Lani nnseosesseiondasrasvesosanrinannnnesvovnesveit on JAX 237

IFS... sosntbsuciecbnicapiisaniiniscupeadiiegeanana aan ‘JAX 238

AS ECS RRA aeRO IS JAX 239

ak EIR a REP MANE Seete AEC rn JAX 240

a xxxXVI

Volume IV or

: (PAGE

EE Siecle Em RAE ea vu. SAK 241

a JAX 242

eR a ae JAX 243

eS ene eae ee ane JAX 244

0 a ee JAX 245

a ae JAX 246

NE See eT Smee ee ra oP JAX 247

a JAX 248

LE ie ERE SE eee eR aere ele aI JAX 249

TR ee ao vee mera eo JAX 250

EEE Geel eee NEON 4 See ane JAX 251

ae JAX 252

ECE OREN ania entries ers JAX 253

PALER amen Aer te aul: JAX 254

aS ee JAX 255

EE SEDs Sve eee ane JAX 256

Ree een nen naire hire JAX 257

OMEN Tee NAT JAX 258

css cpecsecrearapeervinsonatiindeliccscssmirsiditeciioi JAX 259

SE ER eT SOR AM fee JAX 260

EE A EPL oe JAX 261

Re RET ree Sea JAX. 262

NN hl JAX 263

.’ XXXVII

Volume IV |

; PAGE -

I a icsscseissninet cc iomiscstpinist JAX 266

ae iseincte Aiea ituntiniy rites lata a JAX ‘266

ERIN Ie TET PRES tH JAX 267

EASIER ener erent ren ar Pe a NY eerie JAX 268

ae isis ibbstnctias sdlclesssudsscdesuistesmadahiceeias JAX 269

SO isha actesssssipiassnptiapscssicisspsssotanssclbctscoisttis * JAX 270

Ne ahs ccccssocipaceaiaseabehtilens ieee co ties meen JAX 271

Os seciaciblnntit ccicnatiens ioe tee ale JAX 272

LEAR en rE ye rari Se POR TERED JAX 273

ER ERR eet nie seen Se Wet retire Meera Tas JAX 274

dt NORE Me ies aera re a ETM Cyr JAX 275

EEE OTB aE PT oe mT Prt a ony eeaedebans ' JAX 276

206H ............. isishadieincebORestl decid ctaitedctiiedsinacasiisocaucte JAX 277

SEEDER ZRII Tae He eS RPO rN ITE JAX 278

I a iclikaiaiainiceehcin-whstascontiodibastuateilicbiaecsinicle JAX 279

EERSTE is Oe TT eee eR Pe JAX 280

I his si chaadsapinlis hea teas NarasiibiadeasiSitedseeceicatbasnat JAX 281

oR IERET vie CiPocrer naan ON rTP Soa URES . JAX 282

EERO ee ev Mere CoE NTT eer error JAX 283

RRS rar ere Oe Co eer JAX 284

TERETE oc rr oe TER JAX 285

RRR NOIRE eR eo aN Oe ae JAX 286

EN IESE ieee ren eee Teh re ne JAX 287

aE EEN Rene ce rune FE eT POI JAX 288

Ibi ilaiaiabcinlltaiaitascipiaiaiae, Mat nix JAX 299

XXXVIII

Volume IV

PAGE

OTA AR ee JAX 290

0 een eae een ee te oe JAX 291

EPRI Caper 6 Uist cok sere ree meine a JAX 292

SE Ee TED ONT TE JAX 293

SOMES aecsncssevrsevecnegnetiennenarseennenooneunenneunenses ‘JAX 294

a eee el aa JAX 296

| SEO eR ERM NE ere JAX 297

a gale JAX 299

i JAX 300

Ta se is Ree aaron Rae eo JAX 302

| RR ek Vaan ee eee JAX 303

5a, aco semebiditapiagetinndactonld JAK 304

LAA Ge CENCE PON JAX 305

EERE Ree En NER ona nC JAX. 306

Ae la RC ERC ae a AAD Pe JAX 307

a ls JAX 308

iin JAX 309

ae, a “JAX 310

(ile es ect EDI ed ER JAX 311

EAT FS ORR DET De JAX 312

REE EE PR EA NI ee OE JAX 313

at: Volume 1V

. PAGE

iCal sa casinnatsiipmibsidasii JAX 340

| ANT REE

sh eeselininanshancioocoum JAX 342

I ished inchsscbdeeapsenaniaionaibasouiihenetieoes - JAX 343

RAE ce scaanasiiaiels JAX 344

Tr sessile JAX 345

Tl eas JAX 346

ARENA ee ea JAX 347

hs EROS ee . JAX 348

ee Ne JAX 349

A cascstic aisle ibitinigpuana Px JAX 350

| AE AE EAC OO Sa Oe aE. JAX 351

EES SEE acai Se ee JAX 352

Se RCE See ree a eT ae JAX 353

EEE OE TET JAX 354

RE IRE SePae sneer eet ota eee JAX 355

SE et ee ee ee JAX 356

CR eee JAX 357

RISE ene Se ae een ee eee JAX 358

254 .:........ RSE nee MY SRO eC ea JAX 359

255 organ silanated saa Recta JAX 360

ROOTS DOCORE LOTT Ca JAX 361

SERED» 2s. <necensesersvonsnscceniigosssovesnecveceoptttinaiaceeseeszceeecees ‘... JAX 362

YL LO ee ea JAX 363

Folume 17 !

PAGE

AE RR fe OO EE AT JAX 3644

Gt OE UE PO APT OT 2... JAX 365 |

RYAN A Ak 366 |

PRET ne eee ENe 15.2 ES SRT TE Oe JAX 367 ?

ESI RP AOA NT, “ JAX "368: ©

hi sccrngncsaciinsinicitiseeseilllliainiionigieatabic. ike JAX 369

I lai cnencdelaninigceconmnnenguepiinbtios JAX 370°

"ER Nena eee EEE Sean cide 7 pes 371

ETE Ae OE ONO ES ON TT y AX 372

de bac tells tatgcealadcta ec ‘saunrien SAK 898

a RSI pichiatieccamenten JAX 374

SE RSPR ae OP RIE encore JAX 375

I SNM AEP OTA: JAX 376

EE IT NE TAC JAX 377

I isis asaicceaitnniciilaniahdiien ieiiaassiabe JAX 378

dics, cassiaenaccanaiens rnetlngsinissitat JAX 379

Cae a OE TE OT 5 I JAX 380-——_

Lf ERR Rae Oe PE ITS JAX 381

TL... saslensiseahvoulnaaiiaiiaandlabiaiesii tania JAX 382

i sistsbishensssalliuibinddueinababilauoviaén JAX 383

I Bis: siadensicionahiainasishacd A chcaptipihipildbiiadiia JAX 384

IE 5a cccssascetitsnapiiaslinleditinibaaiadaiiseioscl JAX ‘385

aie sslptleacaniiolaiasaaliacih JAX 386

of Rae EEL OR eee ae JAX 387

xLIII

Volumes IV. and V —

Zhe ¥

Volume V

PAGE

TNE SE ise Cee SA a JAX 435

OS Re an Ree JAX 436

hh cadena JAX 437

EE EECA Se en EID JAX 438

OE SOE OR OL JAX 439

NT ae ee lea eae JAX 440

ee ate enn RR A eee JAX 443

a JAX 444

AEE Tele CU Ea JAX 445

ee tle a JAX 446

i ada. BSR HRA JAX 447

Oe RA I TOE JAX 449

go LE a TDA ates vane JAX 450

i eesleliussinning JAX 451

ee Gai elansinimiahasaeaceen JAX 452

4... a a ee < e JAX 453

a ie a ei nauatnn JAX 454

Bo es coiscscontaisientnin mobonosonnosnneshnsrangoitssnes JAX 455

et EE A eR JAX 456

hai chinccoin ie slag a cana JAX 457

THE ccstsons Cspdunaeincamebaiiiecin,-- aaa a

LT A Se

Oa ee > .

| SEES RO Co JAX 475

| , xLvt

Volume V |

tn PAGE

ee REO Ue (JAX 485

a a ae JAX 486

BGI seciciccoonimsen aT NR ei JAX 487

Os alae JAX 488

OO asi sinnsisnspinsinnirrnrercncomesaniilaioerornstt JAX 489

a a Os JAX 490

ROLLE SLT JAX 491

A Ce Ne ERI won JAX 492

asim coneianneiitilee JAX 493

I sicsssccsnensccvspnnnernnanntnonsorrvsonenoncoessoose’ en JAX 494

ee aN RN ee PINT JAX 495

Ee a eae aN OM Te an EN MPI rer JAX 496

1s acaligpieabiealasbabaindaniooapmieialenanuniia JAX 497

le ee TT Aa OER JAX 498

ee ART OITA AOE JAX 499

ch. SRETEE OP Ree maT NE JAX 500

CY. |); Tid puleineidiadhiedinianeabiaabioiandaniii JAX 501

IIIT. = i innicnsiudiduisbiiiadisitiineapensiiennmniinnint JAX 502

Ce ne cet sto JAX 503

Te A NERDS JAK 504

O62... ane JAX 505

Dh AAO OEE. A EOE ne JAX 506

Se ae ai JAX 507

a 9 RR SEA aE OLD JAX 508

ZLVIII

VolumeVo

. ~‘PAGE

0 ERE ae OE JAX 535

ee eee Sea ARN aaaiRessihaessaiisis JAX 536

en a JAX 537

canteens JAX 538

RENEE NSS eC . JAX 539

“PE A SNe a SE acai as JAX 540

cc wintttinambe JAX 541

cannons JAX 542

ae ES <p IE JAX 543

EE SRE ae ORE JAX 544

NE RO re Oe a JAX 545

a Lah Sc JAX 546

NS A EES D2 a JAX 547

EERE iO ET JAX 548

scenes JAX 549

a menissiorioes JAX 550

EEE Ss Sd a JAX 552

a scosnore JAX 552

a cissssincenminnes JAX 553

EI ET Nc EER JAX 554

EEE 1 LAD JAX 555

eee JAX 556

EL ERG Ran TBST ARR OC JAX 557

niente JAX 558

Lil

(January 11, 1956).

(2) :

, _ UNITED STATES Or AMERICA

Bzronr anna ‘TRADE Comuassion

(Same Trriz]

Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Com-

mission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by

said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason

_ to believe that The B. F. Goodrich Company, and The Texas

Company, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have vio-

lated the provisions of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Com-

mission Act (U.S. 0. Title 15, Section 45), and it appear-

ing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect ©

thereof would be in the public interest, hereby i issues its

- complaint stating its charges ad follows: ”

‘ParacraPn Onz: Respondent, The B. F. Goodrich Com-

pany, hereinafter sometimes referred to’ as ‘<Qoodrich”’ is

a corporation organized, existing and doing business ait

the laws’ of the State of New York, with its principal of-

fice and place of — located at 500 Main Street, Akron,

Ohio.

Respondent, The Texas Company, sometimes Korein

after referred to as ‘‘Texas”’ is a corporation organized,

existing and doing business under the laws of the State of

Delaware with its principal office and place of business Io-

cated at 135 East 42nd Street, New York 17, New York.

i Paniekeree Pes: Goodrich, one of the four leading man-

ufacturers of rubber products in the United States, is en-

gaged in the manufacture and sale of a great variety of

rubber and associated products, including tires and inner

’

SA 2

Ly gee ey’ : Complaint ~

tubes. Tt i ig ale engaged i in the purchase,. resale om" dis-

tribution of batteries, automotive parts and accessories and.

other items reférred to as Car and Home Merchandise.

(3). Goodrich sells,its various products directly to the con-

. suming public through more than 500 company owned and

operated retail outlets, and to other. retailers and whole-

salers having. places of business located in. the’ ‘various

_ States of the United States. Its total net sales in 1954 were

more than: one-half billion: dollars. |

Certain of Goodrich’s said products, naniély, tires, in-.

ner tubes, batteries, automotive parts and accessories, and

certain Car and Home Merchandise items, are known in the

trade as‘'‘ TBA’? products: ‘(an abbreviation for tires, bat-

teries and accessorivs) and will hereinafter be so referred

toi in this complaint. <

--Pansorsrn TER: Texas is a large producer ‘snd dis.

tribntor of petroleum products. Directly or through its

‘ “wholly owned-or controlled subsidiaries Texas is engaged

. in substantially all branches of the: petroleum industry, It

produces crude oil from its wells, cracks and refines gaso-

line, and r es and produces lubricants and a wide range

of other ; -oleum products, Sales of said products are

made to many types of customers, including petroleum

wholesalers. (heteinafter referred to as ‘‘distributors’’)

arid.service stations. In.1954 its net sales totaled more ‘than

one. and one-half billion dollars. Texas also acts as an agent

if promoting the sale of the TBA products of certain com-

_. panies, in those of pespondaent aed, in the man-

ner ‘hereinafter described. . . 4

"Pangan, Four: In the Pecan and conduct of their

‘aid ajses respondents are now and for many years

chaye been engziged in.commeree, as ‘‘commerce”’ is defined

mn ederal Trade Commission neath in ‘that. they ba a

sales _ pun

, Complesint >

. ° itor < 2 “s 7 eS

said products, including said TBA products, or.cause them .

to:be shipped from the states in which said products are —

-manufactured.or warehoused to pi srs thereof located = -_

in other’ States of the United, Stéteq and the District of — .

Columbia. - muse os sts ty gunk ..-

Paracrapn Five: In the course and conduct of.their .

said business of selling, and promoting. the sale of, TBA

products in commerce, respondents are now and for many .

years have been engaged in competition with other corpo-

rations, partnerships, individuals and firms. re

: z : ;: -

Panacrapx Srx: Goodrich sells said TBA products di-

rectly and through wholesalers to many classes of custom-"

ers, including service stations who purchase fér_resale.to

consumers for replacement use in their automobiles. Serv-

jee stations, by the nature of their business, are particn-

larly well adapted to be: outlets for the sale of: TBA. prod-

ucts to the motorist consumer. They congtitute ‘a large and

‘increasingly iniportant market for TBA prodnets...... ©

(4) Texas sells its petroleum products, directly and

through distributors, to more than 42,000 service stations.

- Tn addition to petroleum products, a substantial number of

- these stations sell TBA products. ©“ = = = «©.

- Panacrare Saver: In connection with Goodrich’s sale

of TBA producti in éommeree, it has entered into @ con-

tract with Texas under which Texas agrees to promote the- .

sale of Goodrich’s TBA) products to the service stations

. and distributors selling Texas’ petroleum: products. ‘Texas

has also entered into a su tially similar agreement with

- the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company (hereinafter re-

‘ferred to'as Firestone) as to\the stations and distributors

selling its petroleum products} -

ores _ JA4

Complaint - 3 ie a

Under said contract Goodrich pays Texas an ‘‘over- .

ride’? comnfission, ranging from 5% to 10% on the net ©

sales of TBA products to service stations and distributors

selling Texas’ petroleum products in return for the influ- ©

ence and aid given by Texas in promoting said sales. Texas ~

_ has a large number of service étations and distributors af-

+ filiated with it which sell only its petroleum products and,

pursuant to its, agreements with Goodrich ,and Firestone,

in various ways, urges, recommends and persuades the op-

erators of these outlets to purchase the TBA products of

Goodrich or Firestone; Said stations and: distributors at

-- no o timg authorized or requested Texas to find for them, or

commit them to, a source of supply for TBA produtts.

Said stations and distributors do not receive any pant of

the override commission.

. Said service stations and distributors are operated o8- |

tensibly as independently owned business enterprises. How-

ever, their relationship with Texas is such that they are

subject to its control. Such control is inherent in the power _

‘Texas has by virtue of the various’ types. of contracts of

employment, leases, purchase contracts, credit card con-

° tracts, franchises’ and other agreements between. it ang

said service stations and distributors with respect to petro-

leum products and the occupancy, operation, use and t-

; ure of the stations, other premises, ‘ facilities and eqnip-

ment. Said agreements are for short terms or a may be

terminated or cancelled by Te&as without reason at the end

of the term or prior thereto for non-performance of certain

provisions. Some of gaid provisions are so broad and gen-

eral as to be susceptible of arbitrary interpretation and

sc & basis : for termination of the agreement by

oT,

Thus, the economic welfare of said service stations and

distributors -is- largely dependent upon Texas, If Texas

‘ghooses, for whatever reason or°no reason, to terminate

= /

ra eer oe —,

Complaint

.. id (5) franchise or other agreements the’\cperatof of .

the sérvics station or distributor either loses his business:

entirely or must change to a different brand of petroleum ;

prodpets or change location ‘or both depending uport the.

type of lease arrangément involved. Such ‘termination ¢

would result in great financial loss and‘irreparable injury -

* to thé operator, such as loss of his business, customer good-

will, sales, profits and cost of relocation. = hae :

By virtue of these circumstances, ‘Texas can gréeatly.in-

fluence and control the purchasing and marketing activi-

ties: of: said. service stations and distributors. Such influ- _

‘ence and control has been’and is being exercised by Texas .

over its affiliated Service stations and distributors by rec-.

oimyhending, urging, persuading and ‘causing them to pur-

- chase @ substantial quantity of TBA products from Good-

rich and Firestone, the ‘sellers designated:by it.

~ . Papacrarn Eient: By virtue of said override commis-

sion agreement which Texas has entered into with Good-

rich, the latter has sold substantial quantities of TBA prod-—

ucts in commerce to said service stations and diStributors.~

Goodrich has been increasingly successful in selling TBA —

products to said service station and distributor market —

controlled by Texas. For example,’ Goodrich made such

sales, under said: agreement, amounting to—$6,868,751 in”

1951: and approximately $13,000,000. in 1952 on which it

paid Texas commissions of $700,000 and $1,100,000,’respec-

_ tively, for those years. ents ae Re

Also, under ‘the agreement between Texas and Fire-

stone, as described hereinbefore, the latter has sold sub- _

- stantial quantities of TBA products to said service: sta-

tions and distributors. Firestone made such ‘sales amount- *

ing to $26,973,539 in its fiscal year.1952 and $31,248,557 in —-

its fiscal year-1958, on which it paid Texas commissions ‘of

$2,286,632 and $2,723,890, respectively, for those years.

FY é De

- Panacrarn Nove: ‘In addition, Goodrich has entered

_ into the same or a substantially similar override agree-

ment with five other oil companies. Said oil companies ex-

. ereise control over the service stations and distributors:

~which purchase their petroleum products in the same man-

ner and for the same reasons ag hereinabove alleged as to

Texas. By virtue of said agreements, Goodrich has heen

and is increasingly successful in selling TBA products to -

the service station and distributor market controlled by oil

_ companies. For example, under such agreements Goodrich’s

_, Sales increased from. — in. 1946 ‘to more than

$16,500, 000 in 1952.

".@

| (6) amen Ten: Many cneintiians of Goodrich

and Firestone are unable to sell their TBA products to a '

substantial number of said distributors and service stations

- because of said-override agreements. Many of these com-

petitora do not pay override commissions to any oil com-

- ‘pany. ie " :

PansGnarx Eaves: Among the effects of the dete:

and use by respondents of said override commission agree-

ments, and each of: them, under the circumstanées and in

~ the manner “hereinabove alleged are ‘that they have:

1 Foreclosed a large and substantial amount of busi-

_ ness to manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers

+. and other vendors who compete with Goodrich and :

eae | Firestone in the sale of TBA products.

hi "Injured, lessened, prevented and. destroyed com-

er renew Teen and be-

tween each of them and other manufacturers, dis-

_ tributors, wholesalers and other vendors of TBA

ectmintaets fas Ton sale of anid, prodnets,

JA 7 7

3. Increased substantially the amount of TBA prod-

uets business done by Goodrich and Firestone...

4. Deprived a substantial number of, petroleum dis-

_. tributors and service station’ operators of their

Tight to act as independent businessr on by deny-

| | _. ing them freedom of choice as to the TBA prod-

* | - uets which-they may purchase and stock for re-

5. Deprived the consuging public of equal access to

' the TBA products of competitors of Goodrich and-

Firestone and: other advantages’ which would re- |

sult from the natural and unobstructéd flow of

corhmerce’ in said products under conditions of

free competition. enitt at

Paracrarn Twatve: Said agreements between respond-.

. ents and said agreements between a respondent and others

* ‘not parties herein, and’ the acts and practices of ‘Trespond-

.. ents thereunder, as hereinabove alleged, are all to the prej-

‘ndice of the public, have a dangerous tendency to and have __-

unduly ftustrated, hindered, suppressed, léssened;~re-

strained, prevented and eliminated competition in the sale

of TBA products in commercé within the intent and mean-

ing of the Federal Trade Commission Act; have the ca-

pacity and tendency to restrain unreasonably and have re-.

_ trained mmreasonably such eoinmerce in’ said .producte;

(7): and constitute unfair methods of competition and un-

fair acts and practices, in commerce, within the intent: and

-meaning: of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission

"ss Werepevore, tHE Premises Conswenep, the Federal

| Trade Commission, on this 11th day of January, A. D., ~

> ~! 2a JA 8

etre - + + | Complaint

* Norion” ° -

Notice is 5 Mert given you, The B. F, Goodrich Coni-

pany and The Texas Company, corporations, ‘respondents

herein, that,the 21st day of March, A D., 1956, at 10-0’clock.

is hereby fixed as the time and Federal Trade Commission

Office, Washington, D. C., as the place when and where a

hearing. will bé had before a hearing examiner of the Fed-

-eral-Trade. Commission, on the chargés set Aorth. in this .

, ~ complaint, gt which time and place you will have the right

under said Act: to appear and show. cause why an order

_ should not be enterd requiring you té cease and desist from

the violatiqns of law charged i in this complaint.

. “You are notified that the opportunity is afforded- you

: to file ‘with the Commission an answer to this complaint on

or before the thirtieth | (30th) day after service of it upon

you. Such answer shall contain a concise statement of: the

facts constituting the ground of defense and a specific ad-

mission, deffial or explanation of each fact alleged in the -

complaint, or, if respondents are. without knowl€dge there-

of, a statement to that effect. }

At ‘respondents -elect not to contest’ the’ aligations of

a5 fact set forth in the complaint, the answer shall consist of

a statement that respondents admit all material allegations ‘

‘to be true. Such an answer. shall constitute a waiver pf -

hearing as to facts.so alleged, and an initial decision a ° ..

‘ taining appropriate findings and conclusions and ani appro-'—

| priate order disposing of the proceeding shall be isg

the hearing examiner. In such answer, responderts may,

however, reserve the right to submit proposed findings and.

conclusions and the right to appeal under Section 3.22 of,

the Commission’s: Bales of Practice for Adjudicative Pro-

JA 9°

ot Complaint

Tf any respondent elects to oanitiods a cont order, it .

s shall be done in accordance with Section 3.25 of the Com-

‘mission’s Rules of Practice.

_. Failure to file answer within tte time above’ provided

and failure to appear at the time and place fixed for (8)

hearing shall be deemed. to authorizé a hearing examiner

. without further notice to respondents, to find the facts to be

as alleged in the complaint, to conduct. hearing to deter-

. mine the form of order, and, thereafter, té enter an initial .

decision containing such findings and order. peice is -"

¢ , Is Wrrvess Wueneor, the Federal Trade Comuiniesion ee

| has caused this, its complaint, to be signed by its: Secretary,

and its official: seal to ‘be hereto affixed, at Washington,

D. C., this 11th day of January, 1956.

By the Commission.

- Order Designating Hearing Examiner

Pte. (January 1, 1956)

(9) | a

ONITED STATES. OF AMERICA

of Barone FupenaL TRADE Commission

of | 7.

| "Pursuant to authority vested in the Federal Trade Com-

mission and delegated to the Director, Hearing Exeminers,

iz Ie Ondenap that Bari J. ‘Kolb, a hearing examiner of

this Commission, be, and he hereby i is, designated and ap-

pointed to take testimony and receive evidence in this‘pro-

eoeding atid to pean all cacg duties authorized by law.

Evererr F. ‘Havonarr,

ee Hearing Examiners.

ee Bo veyns carried out by ‘Texsé, is an efficient method

wa *

Answer of Respondent The Texas Company s

ger ela yee cael

| -DNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

” [Same Tre] 4 cs

nie Respondent Te Texas Company for its answer to the ~

complaint in the above entitled proceeding states: ~ ya.

| VL f i |

“ihe sales commission plan, alleged in*the complaint.to .

Goodrich Company (heremafter referred to as ‘‘Good-

: a

; , II. ai: SS, acy . :

1: Answering the allegations of paragraph numbered

-. One of the complaint: | “mre :

* Tt admits the allegations thereof. ¢ »

~~ @

| | Tk 12 Sea a

| Answer wf. Reapondent The Teaas Company = * :

te 2. dnweetne the allegations of ‘paragraph numbered

Two of the complaint: a

BS. ' Itis without knowlédge as to the allegations thereof ex-

ts -cept that it admits that Goodrich is engaged in the manv- |

za, ‘facture and sale ofa number ‘of rubber and associated

\° products including tires and inner’ tubes, and is engaged in

the purchase, resale and distribution of Batteries, automo-

tive’ parts and certain accessories and it admits that the

term TBA is applied in the trade to products such‘as tires,-

— tabes,. sagas and certain -other. nocessories.

, 3, Knwearing. the Seiten of paragraph numbered 2%

-. - Three of the complaint : .

: It admits ‘the allegations of the first sentence thereof. It:

denies the allegations of the second sentence except that it .

admits that directly, or through its sub#idiaries ar affili-

=, + ‘ated Companies, it has engaged in substantially all branches

of the Spetro letim, industry: It 3 the allegations of the

third. ae Ey It admits thé ¢ ions of the fourth sen-

tence except that it is without knowledge as to thée-allega-

tion that sales are made to many types of customers, the -

: meaning of which phrase-is not clear to Texas.. It admits

the allegations of the fifth sentence. It denies the allega*

tions of the sixth’ sentence except that it admits that Texas

acts.as’a sales representative in promoting the sale of TBA -

| products of certain aeipgenen, — that Goodrich i is one of -

| such companies ag : :

de : : oe

' 4. Answering the allegations of ace aumbered :

Four of the complaint: =

* Tt admits that-it ships odes petréidain: proddots from

“some but not-all states in which y are produged or reé-

. fined or. stored to purchasers or 21) dealers located in

some other’ states of the ee States and the District, of

eae oc tai

| Answer “ Respoibont The. Tesas Compiaiy

a JE dni tit hp o ann so

from the-states. in which such products site es

in other states of the United States and. the: Distrint.of 0o-

« lumbia and it is without knowledge as to the allegations, of

. paid jn so far as they refer to Goodrivh’ end: its

method o carrying on its business. Respondent isnotvre- - ,

riser the legal conclusions as to the termé‘‘eom- ,

>, but it denies that any facta allepd in paragrd@. |

nuimblted Four confer an jurisdiction on. the: Federal: °

Trade Commission with r pect to any. conduct. by, Texas

in connection with. PBA prodyftts. eee.

,, ae ‘Kisteig the allegations of paras murbered

‘ Five of the complaint: -

It denies: the allegations thereof et that it ndmite.

promoting the sale of TBA products which are sold imcom-

petition with others. Respondent is not required to answer

the legal conclusions ii said paragraph, numbered seine cs oe

coast Suk tes aors Rosy

6 Answering the allegations of paragraph num :

- Six of the complaint: ‘i ais FOS oY be

is without knowledge as to the allegations ‘stated in

the first sentence thereof except it admits that. Gvedyich.

sells TBA products to service stations, It admits the: alls: -

- gations of the second and. third sentences. theteof aa

that it is without knowledge as, to the allegation that.serv-" --

’ joe stations constitute adMMncreasingly important market,

‘the meaning of which phrase is not clear to Texas.

“It denies the allegations of the , fourth sehtence Deiat

except that it admits that its: petroleum products yre mark-

ted by approximately-38,000 service station dealers.” Ht ad-

- Perelacherernmi geen ene

vine ates tae NON ts oh

oP egut, B

JA 14

Answer of Respondent The Teaas Company : 4

products, but iti is without knowledge as to the allegation

that-a substantial ‘(22) number of service stations do so,

* as the meaning of the vena § eubstantial number’? is not..

— ‘to Texas. RE, “

Se snouts ‘the aHegations of paragraph ‘numbered

dares of the complaint :

Tt denies the allegations of the first ihred: simtaniios

thereof. (the last of which is in the second subparagraph) —

except that it admits that it has separate contracts. with °

‘Goodrich and Firestone -whereby each of said companies

separately agrees to pay to Texas certain commissions on

specified net sales of TBA products of Goodrich and Fire-

stone respectively’ i in consideration of the assistance and

_ services to bamgndered ‘by the Texas‘sales organization in

_ corinection. with’ promoting the sale: respectively of Good-

rich and Firestone-TRA products. But for:the exact terms

. and conditions of said contracts, ‘Texas seeks leave to refer

to the actual: written. agreements between the parties in-

‘volved.’ The-allegations of the second and third sentences

|. jm'sd‘far as they rekite to Firestone are irrelevant in this

puleietiod, te xibieh Ripsrtone i220 SPEAY::

°° ¥t Getiies the allegations of the fourth sentence ‘thereof

except that it admits that there is a large number of serv-

ice stations ‘and distributors which sell principally ‘its pe-

troleum products, and that it urges and recommends, in

' proper and lawful ways, the pugchiase of either or both of —

_, @oodrich’and Frestone TBA products by service stations

end distributors handling Texaco products. ‘The ‘allegations

the;fou Sn ia in 80 far thas espe relate to Firestone.

<n si ch ine a ap a

Seb 1 toe ssource of supply for TBA products. It ad-

mite the allogations of th sixth sentence thereot

@ .

JA 15.

) Answer of Respondent The Texas Company

It denies the allegations of the seventh sentence, except

that it admits that the sérvice stations and distributors ‘in

question are independently operated businesé. enterprises.

. It denies the allegations of ‘the eighth, ninth,: tenth and

eleventh sentences, except that‘as to the allegation of the

tenth sentence, Texes admits that at the end of the term of _

certain agreements, (23) such agreements terminate and- . ‘

Texas may, prior to the expiration of the term of an agree-

ment, terminate such agreement for, certain mee:

ance by the other party thereto.

It denies the egations of the twelfth sentenee, but. ey

_ states that the ecohomic welfare of service stations and dis-

tributors handling Texaco products derives benefit. from

the high quality and reputation of such products. It al-

leges that the allegations of sentences thirteen and fourteen

are hypothetical, argumentative and improper, and they

are denied.

It alleges that the allegations of the fifteenth and six-

teenth sentences are based upon the aforesaid hypothotical,

argumentative and improper allegations, and they are de-

nied. ‘The allegations of the sixteenth sentence in so far as

they relate to Firestone are irrelevant 1 in this ga ae

to which Firestone i is nota party. : fh pe

ae Answering the aljegations of paragraph numbered

Bight of the complaint:

aie It denies the allegations of the first sentence theresf ex-

2 cept that it admits that Goodrich has sold TBA: -products to

' service statioris and distributors of Texaco products; it is’

without knowledge as to the allegation that Goodrich has

‘sold ‘‘substantial quantities” of such products, the mean-

ing of which phrase is not clear to Texas. It denies the alle-.

- gations of the second and third sentences except that it ad-

mits that t Goodrich has increased its dollar volume of sales nes

- Jk16 |

_ Answer of — The Texas Company

_ to service stations and ibutors of Texas petroleum ©

' prodncts and that the sales amounted to approximately the

_* ~-figuutes: stated for. 1952 and that the commission paid. to

Texas under its agreements with Goodrich amounted sub- -

stantially to the sum alleged in the complaint for that year.

It denies the allegations of the fourth and fifth sentences

except, thet it admits that Firestone has sold quantities of

TBA products to service stations and distributors anna

Texas petroleum products, and except that it is without

knowledge as to the volume of Firestone sales for its fiscal

years and the commissions paid to Texas thereon, in view

of the fact that the Texas records are kept by calendar

years, which do not appear to coincide (24) with the Fire-

stone ‘fiseal years; it is also without knowledge as to the

allegations that Firestone sold ‘‘substantial quantities’’ of

TBA products, the meaning of which phrase is not clear to

Texas.. The allegations of the said fourth and fifth sen-

tences are irrelevant in this proceeding, to which Firestone

is not a party.

eer. * Avis the. allegations of t paragraph’ numbered

ine Nine of the complaint:

It is without knowledge as to the ‘allegations ee

except that it denies ail allegations“and inferences that it

exerejses comtrol over the service stations and distributors

wae purchase their petroleum products {rom it.

crn Answering the allegations of paragraph numbered

Ten of the complaint: Fete

‘Jt denies the. allegations of the first nnadionee thereof.

The allegations of the said first sentence in so far as they.

relate to Firestone ard irrelevant in this proceeding, to

which Firestone is not a party. It is without knowledge « as |

ee meen peateien. fatant }

od ~

er ho ae . Ww oe

JA 1T ae

“Answer of Respondeyt Fhe Texas Company 3

11. Answering the allegations of paragraph numbered:

Eleven of the complaint: —

It denies the allegations thereof. ty» “i

12. Answering the dilegations. of paragraph numbéred ‘

Twelve of the complaint :

It @enies,the allegations thereof.

13. Except as above. expressly admitted or qualified, ;

'Texas-denies each and every allegation of the complaint.

(25) ae

iit

As Dodikioiala DaFEnses :

(A) The bringing and prosecution of the aa

-herein is not in the public interest.

| (B) The TBA. sales- commission. plan prey in ‘the,

es — complaint, i in so far as it relates to the acts and conduct of

Texas, is not in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade -

' Commission Act. (U. 8. C. Title 15, Section 45)

_() The complaint i is insufficient, vague, indefinite and

uncertain and does not allege facts sufficient to form a basis

for any relief under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Con-.

mission Act (U.S. C. Title 15, Section 45) or sufficient to

a any cease and desist order. |

(D) Even if the allegations. of the omniptaint ella be .

established, Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission | :

Act (U. S. ©..Title.15, Section 45) does not: prohibit - this -

respondent’s acts and practices alleged in the complaint.

herein and if:said Section is construed to prohibit such acts

| JA 18 |

Answer of. Respondent The thas Co Company

sind obiilhttn it is-void aiid in violation of and contrary to :

the Fifth and Tenth Amendments of the Constitution of the

United States and in violation of and contrary to Articles

Lu and Il of the oo ” the United States.

Weascsiiecid” pe Tus Texas Company prays that . ;

an order be entered dismissing the complaint, and for such.

other relief as may appear to be appropriate.

| Manon J. Bear, Ja i >

—

a ocx Rovatz, ] Hannm, Korcen & CasKEY

By Kannere C: Roya.

-Preveniox W. P. Lonenzex

* Pavt Keene

Attorneys for Tur Purses CoMPANY

* ¢ ® ; >

Answer of Respondent The B. F. ere

April 16, 1956)

‘UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Barcus Fapmnat Taape Coicscmenpa:

(27).

(Sass Trriz]

=-_

| Heopuuleul, ‘The B, F. Goodrich Company, for its an-

swer to the complaint herein :

L Admits each allegation of Paragraph Onn. :

2. Admits ih allegation of Paragraph Two, sisi

denies that it owns “and r, Renee more than 500 retail oe.

lets. :

3. Admits tak tycas' ta tke ld est

‘tor of petroleum products and that Texas renders valuable

sales assistance in promoting the sale by Goodrich of cer -

tain TBA products, but denies that ‘Texas acts for Good--

rich in the manner alleged in the complaint; denies knowl-

' edge or ‘information sufficient: to form a belief as to each

other allegation of Parageeph Tiree.’

4, Admits each éMegation of cia aie? Four, except

denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief |

- as to the allegations concerning Texas, se ed

(By 5. Deities each gati of Parner Pv

cept admits ‘that at present and for years years

in competitth WHEN Vinses, wela"acsd pradties is sale vf

TBA products 'in Corhinierce, wid that Texas renders ‘valu

able sales assistance ia promoting the sale ry Go

ae ee Othe ES 8

- game.

Answer of Respondent The ome F. ‘Goodeich Company

6. Admits the first two cabtaniion of ‘Dabegresh Six;

admits that service stations constitute a large and iurpor-

tant market for TBA products and that.a number of serv-

ice stations to whom Texas sells its petroleum products also

sell TBA products. Denies kiiowledge or information suf-

ficient to. form a belief as. to each other rapes of said

paragraph. Lo

/ i

; 4. Denies each allegation of Paragraph Seven, except

admits that it sells TRA products in commerce and that it

has entered into a contract with Texas under which Texas

furnishes valuable sales assistance in promoting 6 Bale by

Goodrich of pr ra TBA products to service stations and

distributors selling ‘Texas petroleum products, in return

for certain commissions on such sales and refers to said

agreement for the terms thereof; admits that there are a

large number of serviée stations and distributors which

sell mainly Texas petroleum products, and that Texas

urges and recommends, in various proper and legal ways,

. the purchase and resale of Goodrich TBA products, among

other, similar products of competitors, by said service sta-

‘tions and. distributors ; admits that said service stations

and | (29) distributors do not receive any. part.of the com- -

‘ mission paid by Goodrich to Texas; admits that. said serv-

ice stations and distributors are operated as independently

owned business. enterprises; and except denies knowledge |

or information sufficient ‘to form a belief.as to agreements:

between Texas and Firestone, .. ,

‘, 8, ‘Denies panne allegation of ie ees Bros ‘except

admits that it has eeeiren) valuable assistance from Texas

ficient to form & hey the’ ‘St mm

3 =

(a scabs

| oui of Respondent The ‘B. BP: Goodrich Company

9 Deniés each allegation of Paragraph Nora, excopt

admits that it has entered into: substautially similar sales

commission agreements with five other oil: companies (two

of them. since 1952), and that it has received valuable sales —

assistance from said oil sempanies in promoting the sale of

Goodrich TBA products, and that the figures in the last sen-

_ tence.of said paragraph are ‘substantially accuraté with re-

noah some senha 1946 'end fever oil —

in 1952. ie ee

10. Denies each allegatipn of Disenieaiih Tex, shiagh

denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

as to the last sentence thereof.

(30) 11. Denies each abegation of Paragraph ELEven.

12. Denies ehch allegation of Paragraph TWELVE.

Shon A SzranaTs Dagrense

a poe, that. the Goodrich’ TBA program, , including .

the sales commission arrangements with oil companies, in

’ purpose and in practice, is a lawful method of competition

‘which benefits consumers, oil station operators and dis-

tributors, and others interested in the manufacture and dis- -

tribution of TBA products.

(2) Alleges that each and every paragraph of the com-

plaint, either taken singly or with other paragraphs as a

whole, fails to state a cause of action under Section 5 of

the Fogel Trade Commission Act. _ 2 |

ne Denies that it has violated the provisions. of ..

tion 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act; and. alleges

. that if said statute prohibits the acts and practices referred -

1 i eae JA 22 (Pe ie ly

Answer of Respondent The B. F: Goodrich Company

aa * to im the complaint it violstogArticlos I) Ii and THK of, und’

_» the Fifth and Tenth Amendments to, the Constitation of.

the United States, and is therefore void.

(4) Duties that this proseding is inthe ble interest.

Waueanross, respondent, The B. F. Goodrich Company,

peage That sho ocmeplaiat herein. be, Gipeplendl. sens

‘Dated: April 16, 1956

| 4 rs Wares & Cass

pitas By Cnn 0 lksoni /.

; -. By Epass Bazton .

PO 14 Wall Street.

er Onset. sa New York 5, N. Y. aie

.» . Attorneys for Respondent, .

_ The B. F. Goodrich Company

-@ * * a : a

Ont Sutsiving trons Appeal ~

wie ae (November 28,1956) © |

(85) ) a

eke - | UNTTin STATES OF AMERICA Sight ava |

- Bayon Fupmnat Traps Congreso. y f “| |

‘Concstmenonsiinn :

; da Wihirjune, Clini

|. ° '> Bobert ‘T. Secrest - bch hi

"Sigurd Anderson 4

Edwerd T.Pait = big bade

| [Sane ‘Trrum) :

This matter having been heard on an interlocutory ap-

peal, filed by counsel in support of the. cémplaint, from

| rulings ef the hearing examiner excluding from the record.

certain. evidence relating to the extent and effect of the

be commission agreement between the respondent, The, Texas :

Company (hereinafter referred to.as Texas), and The Fire- ~

stone Tire and Rubber Company (hereinafter referred. to

as Firestone), arid other evidence relating to the existence,

extent apd operation: of alleged commission agreements be-

- tween the respondent, The B; F. Goodrich Company (here-

inafter referred to as Goodrich), and five oil companies

other than Texas ; and.

Ht nppestinig- Ghat tho. bonis: Por: the ‘ratings paapiained

Ue of was that: evidence of the relationships between Texas —

end Firestone.and between Goodrich and oil. companies:

_. other than Texas have no bearing on the i in this pro-

_ ceeding, which proceeding is concerned: only with tf .con-

4 A ial We Pes

JA 26

‘Order Sustaining Interlocutory on

7 tractual nshidiashiin between Texas and Goodrich, ani the ~

acts and practices engaged in pursuant thereto; and

_It further appearing, however,: that the allegations of .

the complaint are not limited to the existence of atid activi- -

ties under the commission’ contract between respondents

- ‘Texas and Goodrich, but relate also to a general (86)

- course of competitive action by each of. said respondents, .

. under which respondent ‘Texas is charged with having un-

lawfully entered igto and acted tinder contracts with both

_ Goodrich and Fire}tone providing for the receipt by it of

commissions on the sales of all tires, batteries and acces-

sories sold by GSodrich and Fireston€ to service stations

controlled by Texas, and respondent Goodrich is alleged’to

_ have-unlawfully entered into and acted under similar -con-

tracts with six oil companies, including ‘Texas, providing

for the payment by, it. to sai oil companies of commissions

_ ¢-on the. sales of all tires, batteries and accessories sold by

Goodrich ‘to service stations. controlled by said oil com-

os . panies; and / .

The Commission being of the! opinion that the eviduaise

ae rejected by the hearing examiner, apparently was relevant

and material to the direct issues thus raised by the com- |

plaint and that, if so, it should have been received in i sup

‘Port of said issue’: Bore

In'Is Onverep that the appeal of, counsel in ‘support of :

the complaint be, and ,it hereby i is, sustained. wT a

Ir Is Fenenin Clones ‘that the jhearing écemaiter be,

ee and he hereby is, directed to receive into the. record diach

~ relevant; material and reliable evidence as has been dr may -

be offered concerning the details, operation. and competi- - |

' tive. effects of the -override commisston eontract between:

| respon“ent Texas and Firestone and of the alleged. similar

commission — ‘between es Goodrich: and

| JA : |

ay : Ordet Sustaining Interlocutory Appeal, eer ag |

each of the five oil companies other than saapnidint Texas.

Sugh evidence relating to the contract between Texas and

Firestone should be admitted as against respondent Texas

unconditionally and as agaight respondent Goodrich sub- -

" ject to a subsequent motion. t#' strike upon a proper show-_

Ing; and the evidence relating to the alleged contracts be- ~..

tween Goodrich and the five oil companies other than Texas .

should be admitted as against respondent. Goodrich uncon-

_ ditionally and as against Pree carey massage to the -

game type of motion.

By the Commission.

(ig a Bonmer M. Paxnsen, - :

2 Issued: November 28,1956 | :

7 7

. Bo.

JA 26.

Exception of “eect The Texas Company

yreregl 5 —

. (87)

UNITED STATES. OF AMERICA.

Bzrore e Pepenat TRave Oosnatsezom

(ain Teal

To THe HonoraBLe THE Cosriaminonrtien ‘ob

THE FEDERAL TRape barca!

‘The respondent, The Texas Company, bx its attorneys,

réspectfally excepts to. the Commission’s Oxpgr Susrarn-

ING InTERLOCUTORY APPEAL, issued November 28, 1956. Said

_ exception is on the.ground that the said order is violative

"both of the spirit and the letter of the Administrative Pro-

«cedure Act, that it deprives respondent of due process of

law itt violation of Amendment V of the Constitution of the .

United States, and is on the legal and constitutional grounds

set forth m respondents ’s ANSWERING Brier IN OPPOSITION

to InTERLOCUTORY.APPEAL OF CounsEL Supportine THE Com-

PLAINT FROM Ruiines or Heagtne Examiner REJEcTING

’ Certain Evmence filed with the:Commission on November:

8, (88) 1956 and on all other legal and constitutional

er that are applicable.

Respectfully submitted,

Manton J. Eptey, Jr.

Dwicxt, Roya, Haneis, Kogcen & Caskey

By Kenneth C. Royall

Frederick W. P. Lorenzen

Paul Kerins bus

| This 7th day of December, 1956.

Exception. of Respondent

The B. F. Goodrich Lomnny

; , (December 12,1956) . . .

(89)

Om UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Buronn FepepaL Taupe Comnassion:

[Same Tr] >

a To THE HonoRaBLE THE Commissioners OF

| Tre FeperaL TRADE Commission: Habe

The attorneys for the réspondent, The B. F. Goodrich

Company, hereby respectfully-advige the Federal Trade

Commission that. said respondent duly takes exception to

the Commission’s Order Sustaining Interlocutory Appeal,

issued November 28, 1956, ordering the hearing examiner

to receive certain evidence herein and requests that this

exception be made part of the record in this proceeding.

The grounds for this exception are those. stated in the

answering briefs of said respondent and the other respond-

ent herein, The Texas Company, filed in opposition to the -

- interlocutory. appeal from rulings of the hearing examiner —

excluding said- evidence, and the further grounds (90).

that said Order denies to said respondent due process of

law in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitu-

‘tion of the United States; that said Order is contrary to

the intendment and requirements of the Administrative.

Procedure Act and the statutes establishing and regulating

‘the Cemmission, as well as the Commission’s own rules ;

and'on the grounds of all other applicable legal and con-

stitutional i issues raised by y said Order.

Respectfully submitted,

Wars & Cass

. Orison 8. Marden

Edgar E. Barton |

Macdonald Flinn

14 Wall Street —=s_—

_ New York 5, New York. |

Dated: December 12, 1956

; : ; ’ *

aot JAB

Motion of Radpeeadete The Wéuse Company .

(December 31, 1956)

, (92) ; . iets aN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Berort Fevers Trave Commission

pac Trrtz]}

. The Horiorable Earl J: Kolb, Hearing esaaintes

Comes Now respondent, The Texas Company, by its at-

torneys, and shows the following :

1. Counsel, in support of the ecunplaint (hereinafter .

referred. to as ‘‘Complainant”’) pursuant to stipulation,

has given to this respondent the names of certain witnesses

who are to, testify in support of the allegations of the com- |

plaint, at hearings to be held in Chicago, Illinois; Omaha,

Nebraska; Dallas, Texas; and Atlanta, agian beginning

eo" the — day of Sammaty, 1957.

2. Upon. information and belief poarener jes com-

municated with persons, other than those disclosed to the

‘respondent, as possible prospective witnesses in this pro-

‘ceeding, including a large number of dealers, companies

and distributors eeqcer: the etn of The Texas Com-

pany.

Be: 3. If, as now appears, ctmntieintiat'ke endeavor-

pport the allegations of the complaint by intro-

ducing elo vidence. purporting to show by sample the conse-

quencés arising from the alleged unlawful practices of the

respondent, then, m order properly to weigh such ‘‘sam-

ple”, it is necessary to know the total number of persons —

with whom complainant has communicated prior to picking

the — It i8 also necessary to know the basis upon —.

’ “¢

JA 29

“Motion of Respondent The Texas Company

-which .-¢ witnesses were selected. ‘The soihlanasicettiina

with all persons contacted and their replies will throw light -

* ppon the method employed to choose the witnesses. *

Waenerong, respondent prays. ‘that the. coitighaizant: be”

directed to: give respondent, prior to January 14, 1957,

" separately each of the following: the name, address - and

employer of each pergon with whom complainant, or his

agents, has communicated as possible prospective witnesses

in support of the complaint, together with a statement of

the substance of such communications to each person and

' from each person or-a copy of such. communications if they

were in writing.

Respectfully submitted,

Maniox J. Heat, JR.

Diviiiens: Rovatt, Hazegis, Koozr, & Cisxer.

’ By Kenneth C. Royall

Frederick W. P. Lorenzen

’ Paul Kerins

Attorneys for The Texas Company

- Dated: December 31,.1956.

JA 30

Psd Pia dikes the Co laint in

Opposition to the Motion of December 1, 1956,

Filed o on | Behalf of Respondent, The Texas Company

(J anuary 8, 1957 ) :

(170) a Ke

=e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

| Berore FEepenat TRaDE Commission —

[Same Tire]

Come ow counsel ‘ieee the sini’ in opposi-

tion to the motion of respondent, The Texas Bare ad and

state as. follows:

1. Respondent seeks confidential information which

- only the Commission can reveal.” (Secs. 1.133 and 1.134,

Rules of Practice.)

2. Respondent has failed ‘é show any good or valid

reason why the lack of the information it seeks will hamper

it in its defense, nor has respondent made any showing as

to how such information that is not introduced in the record

_ will in any way prejudice it or er it of due — of

law. !

Wuenerorz, counsel supporting the ren pray that

respondent’s motion be denied. _

_ Respectfully submitted,

mi Perer J. Dus

Peter J. Dias,

Wuitus J. Bovn, Jn. -

_. Wilham J. Boyd, Jr. |

Counsel ae the - senaaa :

January 8, 1957.

Jaa

Sadi Denying Motion. by. Respondent The Texes

Company for Disclosure of Names, “Addresses and -

Employers of Parties Interviewed But Not Called.

as Witnesses |

| (January 9, 1957)

(173) Se ie rae

- | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |

Bzrore FenzraL Trape Commission gee

pee aha: eros = ~~ mn a

[Same Trruz]

This prockeding is before: the hearing examiner upon

motion of The Texas Company for an order directing the

‘attorneys in support of the complaint to furnish to the

respondent the name, address and employer of each person

interviewed during the course of the investigation of this

matter,. together with communieations to and from such

persons and copies of such communications if in writing.

It appears to the examiner that the attorneys in support of =|

the complaint have, in fact; submitted to the attorney for

said respondent the names and addresses of the witnesses

-who were to be called to testify at the proposed series of

hearings to be held at Chicago, Hlinois, Omaha, Nebraska,

Dallas Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia, and that the present |

request by said respondent 1 in its motion is without merit.

_ Ir 1 Tueneronz Oxperen that respondent ’s motion for

disclosure of names, addresses and employers of parties

interviewed but not called as witnesses be, and the same

is AP denied. y

Kann J. Kors

Earl.J. Kolb;

Hearing Examiner.

- January 9,1957. 0 |?

7 a JA 32

. Motion to Strike of Rawpiadent The Texas Company

(November 8, 1957)

(260) 3 }

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Berpee THE FEDERAL Traps Comission

[Same ‘Treuz] “

To rm Hononasux Fant J. mae, Hearre oe Sars

Coane Now, respondent; The Texas Company, by its

attorneys, Marion J. Epley, Jr., and Dwight, Royall, Harris,

Koegel & Caskey, and to the call that the record herein, for

the purposes of submission and determination, shall not

contain evidence which is not material and relevant to the

issues or is ‘otherwise inadmissible ‘and evidence which is

superfluous and unduly enlarges the record, moves that by

. appropriate order of the Hearing Examiner, and for the

reasons and. on the grounds set forth in the Specification

attached ‘hereto, the evidence, heretofore received and iden-

tified in the Specifontion attached hereto, be atricken from

the record.. es )

Respectfully ae am

Manion J: Eptey, Jz.

- Marion J: Epley

Dwicut, Royart, Hanns, Korcen & Ossxey

By Kenneth Royall

_ hiner for. The Texas Company

Bo, or November 7, 1957.

JA 3

Motion to Strike of Beopindent The Texas Company —

(261) , WZ

Specrrication or Eviwence To Be SrRicKEN .

Hearsay. Testimony ne ‘

The testimony cited in this portion of the Specification

should be stricken as hearsay. ° :

For purposes of clarity, we shall consider the hearsay

testimony in the following sas

| A. . Single hearsay.

B. Single my a ineorporating a conclusion or

C.. Double hearsay. . ie

_D. Double hearsay incorporating ‘a conclusion or

_. Opinion, | ris

A. Single Hearsay j

-. We shall use the symbol “Ny? to indicate Sinveny

testimony where there has been no identification either of

the declarant or of the time or ne of the hearsay state-

ment.

' In many instances the ‘‘single hearsay’”’ statement con- §

tains additional evidentiary defects that require it to be

stricken, and we shall pty ce 4 note such defects as they

occur, era |

(262) An example: of the eo of “single it es

| whick, we submit, should be sroreres bo is that of a i

Tr. 959, lines 17-19.

“\

| JA 34 |

Motion to Strike a of Respondent The Texas Company

| ‘Yes, I talked to the operators and ey told

(N) me that they couldn’t buy from me. They said

we have to handle Goodrich. You know how it

is. 99@

. The following iihties Poe? be stricken:

LW itness : Transcript Line |

1..(N). Chanenson § Tr.832* _—_ Lines 16-18.

Tr. 833° - ‘*No, you can’t * ** flipped.”

ie line 26 to line 2. ‘Yes, but

; Z i : ; bad * do.’’

(268) 7 debt

2.°(N) Olsen Tr. 868° * Lines 17, 21-22.

. | vate ‘Because he said * * * again.”’

3. (N) . Olsen” Tr.871* . Lines 11-15. ‘

“Frankly, he just * © © gir.”

r * We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or a|-

mitted. If it is merely to show what a dealer had said, the hearsay

statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and is, there- “i

- fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the statement is offered 24

in an attempt to prove something the respondent is supposed to have

bins or’said to a dealer, then it constitutes double hearsay and for ~-

that additional reason should be stricken. In most instances the -

double hearsay reference does not idetify anyone in The Texas Com-

pany to whom the action or statement is attributed ; so that there is a

double lack of identification.. We also consider this testimony in terms _

of double hearsay under our division D, infra. ‘i’ —

Rb gpa nga my cage remedy

done or said to a dealer, then it constitutes double hearsay and for —

that ‘additional reason’ should be stricken. In most instances the

. double hearsay reference does not identify anyone in The Texas Com- ~

pany to whom the action or statement is attributed ; so that there is a

double lack of identification. We also consider this testimony in terms.

of double hearsay under our division C, infra. ’

Dn, SMO Os

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company °

Witness = Transcript Line fue

..(N) Dwyer Tr.924°* Lines 12-15... if

e. Ta ' “he ‘dealer told iad

7 ; months.’? , = ae

5. (N) Dwyer’ ‘Tr. 924** Line 23 to! Tr, 925, line “

f _ “And Bob told me * * *\Com-

pany.”

. (N) . Dwyer. Tr.925° Lines 2426.° . @ y. :

: b.?.> ; “‘Andy’s Texaco * * * Tire.”’ Z

.(N) Shiff | Tr.981°. Lines 24. wg ef

7 . **Petersen tells me? * else.”

‘ ; ich . .

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence j or.ad- ~.

. mitted. If it is merely to show what a dealer had , the hearsay

ement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and is, there-

fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the statement is offered

in an attempt to prove,something the respondent is supposed,to have »

done or said to a dealer, then it constitutes. double hearsay and for

** We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or_ad-

mitted. If it is merely to show what a déaler had said, the hearsay

fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the statement is offered

in an attempt-to prove something the respondent is supposed to have

done or said to a’ dealer, then it constitutes double hearsay and for :

pan :

’ double lack of identification. We also consider this testimony in terms -

of doubfé hearsay under our division C, infra, Pa 4

JA .36

--*

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company,

Witness - Transcript

Line »

Shift Tr. 931°

9. (N)_ Shiff Tr. 936*

10. (N) Jennings Tr. 953°

11. (N) Jennings Tr. 956" *

12. (N) Jennings Tr. 959*

13. (N) Seidenglanz - - Tr. 1196*

(265) tae" ae :

14. (N) Renken. 2] r, 1943°

in : . abe ° ‘Tr, 1244*

al eee

~ Lines 7-8. .

\ ‘the told me * * * him.

L Lines — 2

. **he-teld me * * * done.”’

: “the kept telling me * eo 80.”

~ Tr. 1244, line 3.

_* We do not:know for what purpose the evidence is offered or tad-

mitted. if it is merely to show what a dealer had ‘said, the hearsay -

_ ‘ Statement is entirely unrelated ‘to The Texas Company-and is, there-.

:. fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial, If the statement is offered —

in an attempt to prove something the respondent is supposed to have

done or said to a dealer, then it constitutes: double hearsay and ‘for

Lines 12-16. gas

‘‘Al Feller buys * ° *: Pres-—

‘ tone.’’ : wie a

Lines 17.19, 26 to Tr. 957, line

ORS ae :

‘He told.me * * * in.” Mee

aS ee eee

“Yes, I talked * * * is.” |

" Lines 15-17.- }

“He told me * * * down.”

Lines 17-19.

‘By Firestone’’, and .

“By ¥ * * representative.’’

that. additional reason«should be stricken. In inost-instances the = =

| double ‘hearsay reference does not identify anyone in The Texas Com-

peny to whom the action; or statement is attributed; so that there is a~

double.lack of identification. We also consider:this testimony interms =

" of double Hearsay under our division’D, infra. ~

4 vhs yy

We Q

Ct ees

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

Witness Transcript -Line er iy se

45,.(N) Benken® ‘Tr. 1244* Lines 23-26. =

- e oo ‘‘He said * * * room.”? |

16. (N) - Olsen <r. 1328* Lines 21-22, 26 to Tr. 1324,.

| i oa . oo five BR ss iS 4

‘the explamed it * * * com- ©

eae, : r pany.”’ ,

“47. (N) Taylor © Tr.1415 Lines 24-25.» 3

; 0 He told me * * * them.’’ |

- 18. (N) Taylor _ Pp, 1416* Lines 7, 13-14. | | |

. . “That he.was * * * Fire-

stone.” i :

eo oF A ate:

19. (N) Zimmerman ‘Tr.1642 + Line4. |

ee Se i) ee. | ‘He said that * * *’’ *

(266) -. |

20; (N) Smith ‘Tr, 1685** Lines 20-21. 7

oe, | See “He told me * * * products.”” .

21. (N) Smith - ~~ Tr.1692*° Line26. , ise

ri fries aah cette 88 S/o ae A a Oh

99, (N) Smith Tr. 1693" Line'5. ere

: , i e . = “sthe said * @ @))9

23..(N) “Smith. "Tr. 1693" Line 10. - -

‘¢hat he had * * *?’.

*. * We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or ad-

mitted. If it is’ merely to show what a dealer had said, the hearsay’

ty . statement-is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and is, there-

fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial.. If the statement is offered

in an attempt to prove something the respondent is supposed to have —

done of said to a dealer, then it constitutes double hearsay and for

that .additional reason should be stricken. In most instances the

_ _ double hearsay reference does not identify: anyone in The Texas Com-

--~ .. » pany to whom the action or statement is attributed ; so that there is a

double lack of identification. We also consider this testimony in terms

of double hearsay tinder our division D, infra. . | ;

= * ‘ Mees :; a re

JA 38

“Motion to Strike af Rsisiiiabont The Tenas Company

& * iin ; | Transcript ¢ Lime -

% «|* - Hulme > * "Tr. 1928 Lines 14-16, |

eye ie i ‘e 4 he . ‘she said ees there.”’

95. =": Hulme’: Tr. 1931". Lines 9-11.

es eo : +"... 6h told me ® ® ® tires.”

a6: “ “Hulme. © ‘r.1933 Lines: 24-25.. |

; in sae ‘the told me * * * me.’? ***.

(267). | ee a ae

27. -Hulme © Tr.1936% Line 22 to Tr. 1937, line 3.

3 | ee ain ‘‘He said * * * you:”? oon

. 28.. (N) Bridges "> Mr, 1944* ‘Lines 7-10.

pee ‘‘and he said * * * people.’’

29. (N) Bridges ‘Tr. 1945* Lines 12-15.

SS aes ‘tHe said * * *”? -

30. (N) Bridges ‘Pr, 1946* Lines 5-6. .

aes : | , ‘Sand he also said eee , Fire-

stone.’’

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence is sind or ad-,

mitted. if it is merely to show what a dealer had said, the hearsay

statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and i is, there-

fore, immaterial, itrelevant and prejudicial. If the statement is offered

in an attempt to. prove something the respondent is supposed to have

done or said to a dealer, then it constitutes double hearsay and for

that additional reason should be stricken. In most instances the

double hearsay reference does not identify anyone in The Texas Com-

to whom the action or statement is attributed ; so that there.is a

double lack of ideritification. We also consider. this testimony ft in terms

of double hearsay under our division D, infra.

+08 This hearsay was elicited in cross examination directed to the

: pated evidence admitted in the direct over ‘objection. Since it

particulafized matter admitted over objection, it should be

eG i Se CaN teather. ast

» :

JA 39

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

Witness Transcript Line :

31. (N) Bridges Tr.1957*. Lines 15-16. .

' aes! . “The substance is * * * Qood- -

e . rich.”? eee ' 3

82. (N) Bridges Tr.1957* Isines 22-24. Side

. ee } * “That he was * * * busgi-

nees,"?:288 whici -

(268). ee |

33. (N) Sinclair ' ‘Tr. 2036 Lines 11-12. Roe

| a4 ' “He told me * * * Goodrich.’?

34. (N) Sinclair «Tr. 2088" Line 12. gta. |

7 ‘tHe said that *¢ 10%

35. (N) Chambers Tr. 2049* Lines 24-25,

poet ‘sHe just said * * * to.”

36: (N) Price ~ Tr.2082 «Lines 7-17, |

j ee cae 4 “‘they told me * * * tires.’? °

37. (N) Price ‘Tr. 2086* Line 25 to Tr. 2087, line 1.

, / “That they would * * * han--

» a me ihe

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or ad-

mitfo. If it is merely to show what a dealer had said, the hearsay

statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and is, there-

fore, immaterial, irrelevant.and prejudicial. If the statement is offered

in an attempt to prove something the respondent)is supposed to have

done or.said to a dealer, then it constitutes dadble hearsay and for

that additional reason should be stricken. In most instances the

double hearsay reference does not identify anyone in The Texas Com- .

pany to whom the action or statement is attributed ; so that there is a

double lack of identification. We also consider this testimony in terms

_ @f double hearsay under our division D, infra, |

. *** This hearsay was elicited in cross examination directed to the .

y evidence admitted in the direct over objection. Since it merely

particularized matter admitted over objection, it should be stricken

along ‘with the. original matter. ;

JA 40

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

. . Witness Transcript Line.

41.

$8." Scott © Tr.2108* Lines 6-7.

Pal. 2aae - "That he is * * * Goodrich.”

39, Scott — Tr.2109* Line 17.

: ; ; . “Tt wouldn’t fF eo

40.° °° Scott - ~‘Tr.2111* Lines 9-15.

y ve iF ‘*His words * * * station.’’

Scott Tr.2117* Lines 19-21.

- ‘Oftentimes * * * stock.’’

* We do not: know fon what purpose the evidence is ‘heed « or ad-

mitted. If it is ‘merely to. show what a dealer had said, the hearsay

statement is, entirely urirelated to The Texas Company and is, there-

fore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. ‘If the statement is offered

in an attempt to prove something the respondent i is supposed to have

done or said to a dealer, ther it constitutes double hearsay and for

that additional reason should \be stricken. In most. instances the

double hearsay reference does not identify anyone in The Texas Com-

pany to whoni-the action or statement is attributed’; so that there is a

double lack of identification. We also corisider this testimony in terms -

. Of double hearsay under our division D, Pale:

Jaa oe

Motion to Strike of Riaiiateidi The T eas iimgiany ;

(269) ws Siete | )

B. Single Hearsay Incorporating Conclusion or Opinion —

In certain instances the testimony of a witness clearly

indicates he was stating a conclusion or opinion based upon

a hearsay statement made to him by someone not subject

; to-cross-examination, and—in many instances—by some-.

oné who was not even. identified. With respect to those in-

stances of hearsay stahitesate where either the declarant or -

the time or place is not identified, we shall nate the same by

the use of the symbol ‘‘(N)”’. : )

.” An example of this type of testimony which should be

' Stricken, is that of Hansen, Tr. 1397, lines 22-24:

z “No specific reason outside of the’ fact that

(N) he felt that he was obligated to buy the bulk of

his purchases through Firestone.””* :

| ; a Oe hee

The following evidence. should be stricken:

. ' Witness, Transcript Lime

1. (N) Richmond. = Tr.655*- Lines 20-24.

‘‘When you make * * * it.’

* We do not know for what putpose the evidence is offered or

admitted. If-it is merely the conclusion of the witness as to how

another person felt, it should be stricken. If it is offered or admitted —

in an attempt to show—by inference—what the dealer had said, the. =

hearsay statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and

a" is, therefore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the rong

‘statement is offered or admitted in an attempt to prove s ,

the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a dealer, it

constitutes double hearsay and for that’ additional reason should be

stricken. In most instances the double hearsay. reference does not.

‘identify anyone in The Texas Company to whom the action or state

ment is attributed ; so that there is a double lack. of identification, We

‘ also considef this testimony in terms of double hearsay under our

division D,.infra. : }

see

~ JA 42

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company ed

aaa Transcript Line Siem

."-. ae Tr.688* Lines.13-19. ©

oo, See ‘He said * * * Goodrich.”

3. (N) Arey’ Tr. 690° Lines 12-13. |

sie ‘“‘The gist of * * * tires.’’

(270) °° Mert Sam .

4. (N) Gehrke 'r.706 ~—_ Line 19. _ |

: , ééT would say * @ 89)

5. (N) Edelson Tr.741° Lined. _

ae ‘*No, we are * * *”?

6. (N) Edelson Tr.741 Lines 11-12, 18. .

ic . ‘We are able * * * that.’’

7. (N) Chanenson Tr. 835 _—Lines 3-6, 19. |

| “it would tend * * * policy.’’

8. (N) Chanenson ‘Tr. 836* Line 25 to Tr. 837, line 4.

: ' **He told me * * * prospect.’’

9, (N) Shiff - 'Tr.929* Lines 15-16. eo .

“’ ‘*Because they tell me * * *

to.”

" * We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or

admitted.' If it is merely the conclusion of the witness as to how

another person felt, it should be stricken. If it is offered or admitted

in an attempt to show—by inference—what ‘the dealer had said, the

hearsay ‘statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and

is, therefore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the hearsay |

statement is offered or admitted in an attempt to prove something that

_ the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a’dealer, then it

constitutes double hearsay and for that additional reasom should be

stricken. In most instances the double hearsay: reference dogs not -

. identify anyone in'The Texas Comipany to whom the action or state-

ment is attributed ; so that there is a double lack of identification, “We

also consider this testimony in terms of double hearsay under our

- division D, infra...” Bh, :

; ; JA 43. : »”

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company e

| Witness | Transcript Line es

10. (N) Hansen - ‘Tr.1397 JLimes222% © |.) -*.

. *No specific reason * * * Fire-

5 __stone.”? ee

} 11. (N) Taylor ~ Tr.1412* Lines18-19. . + -

te : ig ‘the couldn’t * * * TBA.”

12, (N) - Taylor * Tr.1413 Lines 1213.°.

| ft a4 ‘He told me *.* * eould.’? 3

13, (N) McCann Tr. 1584 Limes 21-23. &

‘But the gist * * * batteries.””

(271) _* : |

14. (N) Zimmerman Tr. 1642* Lines 7-10. cae

Cee : “TI don’t know * * * handles.’’

15. (N) Snapka , ‘Tr. 1655® “Line 25 to Tr. 1656,*line 1.

' . ‘if he bought * * * room.’’

16. Bridges —-‘Tr.1945* - Lines 12-15,

‘“He said * * * them.”

_ We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or

admitted.’ If it is merely the conclusion of the witness as to how

another person felt, it should be'stricken. If it is offered or admitted

in an attempt to show—by inference—what the dealer had said, the

hearsay statement is entirely unrelated to The Texas Company and.

is, therefore, immaterial, irrelevant and prejudicial. If the hearsay

statement is offered or admitted in an attempt to something that

the’ respondent is supposed to have done or said to 4 dealer, then it

constitutes double hearsay and for ‘that additional reason should be

stricken. In most instances the double hearsay reference does not

identify anyone in The Texas Company to whom the action or state- _

ment is attributed ; so that there is a double lack of identification. We - .

also consider this testimony in terms of double hearsay under our

division D, infra. Pe sii tn6 ees

cA 46

Motion to Strike of: Respondent The Texas Company

(272) ©

| C. Double Hearsay

The testimony cited in this division of the Specification -

should:be stricken as ‘‘dduble hearsay’’—that i is, testimony

by a witness of a hearsay statement which in turn contains

hearsay. In short, the double hearsay statement was not

made 4 the witness but was reported to the witness by the

declarant the witness purports to quote. Thus it is impos-

sible by cross-examination to test the truth of the double

hearsay statement. A statement of this type which should -

‘be stricken is the following (Dwyer, Tr. 924, lines 11-14):

‘‘The dealer told me that Mr. Suffert told him he

had to handle either Firestone or Goodrich products

or he would cancel his lease, and his Tease was can-

celled for nine months.’’*

The witness did not identify the declarant or the place

of the hearsay statement nor was there an identification of

the time or place of the double hearsay reference.

(318) oe tp

D. Double H earsay Incorporating a Gestion or Opinion ;

eo In certain instances there was offered or ‘admitted a

double hearsay statement wherein it is apparent the de-

clarant, referred to by the witness, was stating a conclu-

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or

* admitted.’ If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove. ©

something the respondent has done or said to a dealer, then it consti-

tutes double hearsay and should be stricken: If it is merely to show

what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is‘ entirely' unrelated to

_ The Texas Company and, therefore, immaterial, irrelevant and preju-

_ dicial. We also consider this testimony in terms of “single hearsay”

under our division A, supra. Pls

: JA 4

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas + Conigid|

sion or opinion based upon what someone else had told ‘him. :

The person who had told the declarant the matter in ques-

tion was not, of course, subject to cross-examination, and

in many instances was not. even identified. In other in- og

stances the declarant, who was also. not subject to cross-. *

examination, was not even identified. We -shall use the

symbol ‘‘(N)’’ to indicate those instances where there has }

been no identification either of the declarant or of the time

or place of the hearsay statement, and the symbol ‘‘(DN)”’ sia

to indicate those instances where'the person referred to by

‘the declarant—on which the double hearsay statement, is |

based—has not been ‘identified or there hasbeen no iden- ©

tification of the time or r places of such double hearsay state-

ment.

should be stricken is that of Price, Tr. 2082, line 8-11:

“eee They said The Texas Company told

(N) them they would invest around $30,000 in build-

(DN) jing them a master station, but they were'éx- *

pected to handle all Texas products plus Fire>,

stone. *¢ bed 99

The following evidence should be stricken: —

An example of this type of ‘‘double hearsay’’ which

JA 46

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

5: (N). Edelson ‘Tr.803. Lines “6-11. ““When Texaco

: Witness Transcript Line’

1. (N) Bichmond' Tr.654 - Lines 22-23. “‘it was where a

; (DN) | customer * * * us.’’

(274) . ' me 2 ely

2. (N) Richmond: . Tr.655** Lines 2224; Tr. 656; line 6.

(DN) at ‘and still are told * * * on.’’

3. (DN) Arey: _—§ Tr. 688°* Lines 13-15, lines 18-19.

ae : | -said they * * * Goodrich.’”

4 (N). Arey =—- Tr. 690°*. Limes 12-13. ‘‘The gist of his

1. | Sar conversation * * * tires.’’

(DN) | 4, 7 ‘opens * * * request. P

6. (N) . Chanenson Tr. 831 Lines 1-2. ‘‘In connection with

(DN): ; .* _*9@ ° carry. 9

7. (N) Chanenson Tr. 832° - Lines 16-18. ‘And he said * * *

(DN) act 4: 5,

8 (N) Chanenson Tr. 835** - Lines 3-6. “it would tend °° °

(DN) buying.’’ A

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered or

admitted. If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove

the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

then: it constitutes hearsay and should. be stricken. If it is merely to

' show what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prejudicial. We are also considering this testimony in terms of

hearsa " under our division A, supra.

; _ ** We do not know for what purpose the evidence i offered or

admitted. If the y statement is offered in an att to prove

the t is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

hearsay and should be.stricken. If it is merely to

then it

show what dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prejudicial. We are also considering this testimony in terms of

single | Sepraiies saclay supra. |

JA aT

* Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

| Witness . '- Transcript. Line | |

9. (N)- Chanenson’ Tr. 835** Line 19. ‘‘Adherénce to.*)* #7”

(DN) ig ie ht: | Pi

10. (N) | Chanenson Tr. 836** Lines 25 to Tr. 837, line:4...“He

(DN) | _ told me * * * prospect.?%, ;

(275) Taree 3 v “s his #

11, (N)-, Olsen ~. Tr. 868* Lines 17, 21-22. ‘Because ‘he

(DN) : : : said oe again.’’ *s,

42. (N) Olsen Tr. 871° Lines 11-12, ‘Frankly, he jus

(DN) _ *** Company.” ~ bi

13. (N) Dwyer Tr.924° — Line 25-Tr. 925, line 1. ‘“He said

_ (DN) : , 7° * oa sit

14. (N) _ Dwyer °° Tr.925* Lines 24-26. ‘‘Andy’s Texaco

; (DN) | told me * * * Tire,’’

15. (N) Shiff — Tr.929°* Lines 15-16. ‘Because they tell

(DN) me * * * to,” :

16. (N) . Shiff _ ‘Tr.931° = Lines 2-4. “Peterson tells me

(DN) | ae *.* © olge,”?

* We do not know for what purpose the evidence is offered-or

admitted: If the hearsay stat is offered in an attempt-to prove

something the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

then it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to

show what a dealer has said, the hearsay statenient is entirely unre-

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prejudicial. We are also considering this.testimony in terms of

“single hearsay” under our division A, supra. S

-**.We do not know for what the. evidence is offered or

_ admitted. If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove

something the resporident is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

' then it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to:

show what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-

lated to The Texas Company,’and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prejudicial. We are also considering this testimony in terms of

“single hearsay” under our division B, supra. ;

v. : i JS.%§ ' o°

s ‘

f A

J .

. : e JA 48 | ¢

: Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

fe Witness 3 Transcript 0 YM eg

na @y) Shiff Tr.931* - Lines 15-16. “and said that

eer Se pts ios . °° * Prestem.”” .:*-. :

Ea 18: (N) ay t. eo Tr. 936" Lines 7-8. ‘‘and he told ie i

“ (DN) » ef: ten | | him.’’ ,

~ 19. (N) ‘Sisiiaa -’tf'r, 953" - - Lines 6-7. ‘‘and he told Bates

a: (DN) © Set eee - done.’’

20. (N) - Jennings Tr. ‘all Lines 17-19. ‘‘and they told me

Ce | ioe talon Pane ce a.

21, (N) "Seidenglans Tr. 1196* Lines. 15-17. “He told me * **

(DN) cat ; em Ao ON

leroy. i oy ee ee

(22 :(N): Benken © Tr. 1243* Lines 17-19. ‘‘he kept telling

G- (DN), Pak i ne Se

23. @). " Benken’ Tr1244* Lines 23-26, ‘‘He said * * *

SOMBRE Te sa cal > eae 2

24, (N)- * Qlsen ~ Tr, 1323*.> Lines-21-22; 26 to Tr. 1308 line

Aca er ad a CRE ‘the- explained ° & rods Sa gl

a eee _ pany.” *

25. (Ny. "Hansen a. 1397°* Lines 23-25. ‘che felt ** * Wire-

eS (DN) ° Seis aime stone.” - es :

| Aine We do not know foe what; purpose ihe. liam is. ‘offered or

admitted, If. the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove .

es ‘something the respohdent is supposed to have done or ‘said to.a dealer,

then. it constitutes hearsay and: should: be'stricken. If it is merely to

show. what: a dealer‘has said, ‘the heatsay statement is entirely unre-

‘fated ‘te The Texas Company, and:is therefore immaterial, irrelevant -

id prejudicial. We are. also considering. this scuamere bt in terms of

“singie ¢ hearsay” under our division A, supra. ,

$e ** We-do not know for what purpose the idinns | is offered’ or

ot admitted. ‘If the ‘hearsay statement is offered-in an attempt to prove

| the respondent is supposed to lave done or said to'a dealer, .

_> ‘then it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to

.- -show what a.dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-_

' rere: one oe Coneioes Smeal, irrelevant

_ and prejudicial.. Lochagcle eng agl mge cr

a = under.our division B, pre...

"e, ee “ . cf < & fe : 3

ase-~ . Paes go ge , be

A ee

Motion to Strike of a: The Teens Company

(DN)

evans _ Witness Prabinarieay Line Gis

26. (N) Taylor = Tr. 1412** Lines 18-19. “he couldn’t'* *

. (DN) yi ‘TBA,”’ . :

a7, ° oe: Taylor "Tr, 1413°* Lines 12-13, 16-17. “He told me

we invoice. ”

28. ay q “Taylor. . Tr. 1415* Lines 24-25. ‘‘He told me’ tbat 2

1 (DN) « . them.?? i

29. (N) Taylor . Tr.1416* . Lines 7, 12-13. “That: he 1 was

(DN)° et Mos @ © Ri ipgabenaet ic Sys 7

— $9; (N) |: ‘immernian -Tr, 1642°* ‘Lines 7-10. ‘I don’t know oe

(DN): handles. a ’ ;

31. (N) Snapka Tr. 1655** Line 25 to Tr. 1656, line 1. “said

mg - (DN) sae . that he * * * room.”’

(em). PRC mAY , es

. 32.. (N) _ Smith Tr. 1685" Lines 20-21. “He told me * oe

; 3 ‘products. si

* We do not know for. what purpose the ‘evidence i is offeted or

admitted. ° If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove

the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

sthen it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to

‘show whiat a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre- —~ .'

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant .

' and prejudicial. We are also considering \ this testimony in. terms of

“single hearsay”. under our division A, supra.

my - 8 We do-not: mow for what purpose the evidence is offered or

admitted. If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove.

something the respondent is supposed to have done or said to a dealer, .

- %then it constitutes hearsay-and should be stricken. . If it is merely. to

“. show. what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant,

considering

, and prejudicial. We are also

eee SON

a _— lieatsay” under our division. B, supra. «3

JA 50

Motion to Strike of Respondent The. Texas Company :

| Witness. Transcript Line

33. (N) Smith © Tr. 1692* Line 25. ‘That he had to * * *”

| | “gio | |

34. (N)”- Smith ~~. ‘Tr. 1693. Line 5. “‘he s said he * °° Good-

(DN) é ie ae rich,’’

35..(N) - Smith ° " ‘Tr.1693*. Line 10, ‘That he had to ***””-

(DN) | | 3

- 36. (DN) ' Hulme Tr. 1928". Lines‘14-16. ‘‘he eaid that * * *

a" theré.”’

37. (DN) Hulme’ Tr.1931* Lines 9-11. “‘he told me * * *

Rese: a

38. (DN) Hulme- ‘Tr. 1936". Line 22 to Tr. 1937, line 4. “He

said * * * you.’’***

39. (N) Bridges* Tr. 1944* | ‘Line 6-10>. ‘as I understand

(DN) - °** people.” —

Sabena, We do not*know for what purpose iid evidence ‘is offered or

admitted. If the hearsay statement is offered in an attempt to prove

something the respondent is s

_ then it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to .

show what a dealef has said, the hearsay statement is entirely unre-

mort to The Texas’ Company, and is ‘therefore immaterial, irrelevant

rejudicial.. We are also considering this testimony in terms of

single hearsay” ander our division A, supra. Ae

“Vane JonNedenineer

to have done or said to a dealer,

statement was elicited tn cross-examination di-

- pected ‘to: hearsay evidence admitted over objection and was for the.

purpose

Kae with the original stele

‘of j

-such am matter: - It should be: stricken

.: | Witness

‘JA SI |

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company :

Transcript

Line .

40.

41,

(N) Bridges

(DN) 32

(N) Bridges

(DN)

—_ ~

42.

43.

(N). Bridges

(DN) -

(N) Bridges

(DN)

( N) Sinclair —

(DN)

(N) ° Sinclair

(DN)

(N) - Chambers

(DN) :

- * We do not know for w

admitted. If the hearsay

something the respondent

then it constitutes h

earsay and

show what a dealer has said,

aoe

Tr. 1946*

Tr, 1957°

Tr. 1957*

‘Tr. 2036*

Tr. 2038*

Tr. 2049°

hat purpose the evidence is offered or

statement is offered in an attenipt to prove

is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

should be stricken: If it is merely to

the hearsay statement is entirely unre-.

Lines 12-15. “He said he * * *

them.’’ are. i o

Lines 4-5. ‘‘and he also said ©

* * * Firestone.’’

Lines 15-16. -‘‘The substance is

[a oe 1 Goodrich.’’*** :

Linés 22-24. ‘That he was * * *

business.’’*** oe q

Lines 11-12. ‘the told me * * *

Goodrich.’’

Line 12. He said that * eer

Lines 24-25. ‘He just said * * *

to.? th di anak

lated to The Texas Company, and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prefudicial. We are also consi

dering this testimony in terms of ,

“single hearsay” under our division A, supra. é

** W# do not: know for what purpose the evidence is offered or

admitted. . If the hearsay

something the respondent

“then it constitutes hear

statement is offered in an attempt to prove

is supposed to have done or said to a dealer,

say and should be stricken. If it is merely to

show what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is ‘entirely unre-

_ lated to The Texas Company,

and prejudicial. We are also

‘and is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

considering this testimony in terms of

“single hearsay” under our division B, supra...

*** The hearsay statement .was elicited in cross-examination di-

rected to hearsay eviden

ce admitted over objection and’ was for the

purpose of patticularizing such hearsay matter. . It should be stricken

wee

- along with the original hearsay.

JA 52

‘ ae Bearsay.’ under our divigion A, ware

o. — . cf P

' Motion to Strike of Bespondent The Texas Company

| : | Witness Transcript . Line - r

47. (N) Price © ‘Tr.2082 Lines 8-11. ‘They said* * *

(DN) 7 Firestone.’’ | i

48. (N) Price Tr. 2086* Line. 25-to Tr. 2087, line 1.

(DN) |. | + =, ° ‘That they would * * * handle.’’

49, (N) + Scott Tr. 2108* | Lines 6-7. That he i is not.* * *

| (DN) ° | .. Goodri

50. (DN) . Scott Tr.2109* Line 17. ae wouldn rn sien |

‘ * @ @)») »

51. (DN) Scott Tr.2111* Lines 9-15. ‘‘His words * * *

3 station.”’

- §2. (N) Scott — Tr.2117* Lines,19-21. “Often timés —

(DN) stock.’’

- 9?

* We do not know tie wefiat purpose the "evidence is offered or

_ admitted. If the hearsay statement is. offered in an attempt. fo prove

something the respondent is stipposed to have done or said to a dealer,

then it constitutes hearsay and should be stricken. If it is merely to

show what a dealer has said, the hearsay statement is entirely ‘unre-

lated to The Texas. Company, and. is therefore immaterial, irrelevant

and prejudicial. Weare also considering ‘this testimony in terms of

JA 53.

Motion to. Strike of Respondent The Texas Comiamy.

* (279),

Conclusions and mae

In many instances the testimony: of a witness was no

more than a conclusion or opinion and should, therefore, be

stricken.. An example of this type of testimony: is.that/of

\Wdelson, Tr. 741, line 5:

**No, we are not able*to sell tubes only*under cover.”

The following evidence should be stricken : aes.

Witness Transcript o Line 1,

1. Richmond Tr.653 Lines 8-9, ‘‘it was easier * * *

, time.”” ey O

2. > _ Tr.655 — Lines 7-11. ‘Ini the last * * ©

é oe oneal? ae ogy

3. Gehrke Tr.706 Lines 19, 26 to Tr. 707, line 2

} ‘*I would say * * * you.’”

4, Gehrke Tr.707 — Lines: 16-17. ‘‘Before my time

a . x *** No.”

» : of ve >

5. ~Gehrke Tr.708 Line 9. “I do.” -

6. Edelson Tr.739 Lines 11-12. “You see * * * sta-

ose ' tion.’’ Bet ty |

“7, Edelson Tr.740° Lines 3, 6. ‘ ‘At the present siti

+ | j little.?’. .

8. Edelson Tr. 740 Lines 13, 16, 20-21. Mion, + os

| - eT Ls

9. Edelson Tr. 740, Line 24. “We | are limited ‘ eo»

10. . Tr. 741. Lime 5. ‘“‘No, we are “ot able’

Edelson |

. - Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas bisa

| Wioness Transcript _ Line |

‘11, Edelson § Tr.741 Limes 11-12, 18. ‘“We are ‘able

, of * © © that.’

_ (280) 7

12. Edelson . Tr.741 Limes 23-24. ‘*We are limited

eee basis. ie |

13, Edelson Tr.746 Lines 10-11. ‘“We ate not|* * *-

_.. Business.” - |

14. Edelson Tr.747 Line 2. “Very much more** *”?

15. ~ Edelson Tr.756 Lime 19. ‘We could get * * *”’

| 16. - Edelson Tr.757 Lines 2-3. ‘‘We get asa: | Com-

ptt ' pany’? . . 3

17. Edelson Tr.760 Line 23-24. ‘‘but I 28 not been

. | able * * * there.”’

18. - Abernethy Tr.812 Lines 6, 9. ‘Well, we were * * *

: s . there. ” : :

19. Abernethy Tr.813° Lines 3-8, “Well, jit has been

_ ee setups. 99

20. Chanenson Tr. 824 Lines 13-18. ‘‘If the policies cilestiigs

4 | that.’?

21, Chanenson - Tr.827 — Lines 17-20, ‘and whieh ; gers!

uk: + * prospects. id j

92. Chanenson ‘Tr.827 Lines 24-25. ‘‘Tires = oes

33. Ghanenson. Tr.828 Lines 1-5. ‘‘in some instances |

sa 2 : ey oe * us.”’ |

ie Chanenson. Tr.828 -Linés 7-13. “They might order

JA 55"

' Motion to Strike of = The Texas Company

i ad

Witness “Transcript . Line Ss

25.” Chanenson “Tr. 830 Lines 1-12. ‘We have * * ©

) item.”? :

26. Chanenson Tr. 831 Lines 1-2. “In eynnection * * *

ce eM cS . .

27.. O'Keefe . Tr. 895 Line 22. “He owns * * ¢77"

28. Dwyer “Tr: 906- Lines 19-21, “J found Ne regu-

- * . Jagily,?

: (281) : a er. Meine

29. Dwyer: Tr.921 _—_ Lines 25 to Tr: 922; line 2, “Be-

ty Seg cause he likes * * * judgment.”’

- 30. Dwyer Tr.923 Lines 20-24. ‘‘and also they * * *

: Mae hee ; i

31, Shiff Tr.933 Lines 12-16. ‘‘No * * * that,”

' 32. Jennings Tr.959 _ Lines 18, 23, “No, * 2 © busi, -

af ness,”* dees

Brusek Tr.967 Lines 17-20, “In some instancés

¥ * se nature. 99 . : } :

34. Brusek Tr.968° Lines 24.26. - “because that is

f *?¢s repair.”

35. Brusek Tr.969 Lines 9-13. “The other * © ¢

stocked.’

36. Brusek Tr.970 Lines 7-8, ‘because i inmany***

: rae them.’’ oy

37. Backencamp ‘Tr. 1078: Lines 6-7. “and that i is: ae * wie a

| tires.’’

38. Toft Tr. 1169 Lines 10-12. ‘‘I would consider

: eens * figures. 9 :

- @

JA 56".

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

- Witness “Transcript ‘Line

Toft — Tr. 1179 Lines 25-26. “Yes, we e could soe

. _Conoco.”’

40:' Nelson Tr. 1213 Lines 13-15, 23, Tr. 1214, Line 46.

Th ‘*We are not * * * companies.”’

41. Nelson Tr.1216 Lime 5. ‘‘ Well, we can’t * * *”’

42. Renken Tr. 1237 — Lines 13-15. ‘where there was

as. 0 a * * * otherwise.”’ ;

- 43, “Kossek Tr. 1266 Lines 6-7. ‘sin other words * * *

,t_ 1, ae :

» 44, Oleg. “f _ Tr.1321 Lime 15. ‘Because -I couldn’t

2 : * 9 09)

45. Zaloudek Tr.1472 Line 19. ‘‘justtokeep***” ~*

seal Ce bi

46. . Zaloudek —§ ‘Tr.1473 Limes 12-13, 16-20. ‘“‘I had* * *

: 7 - eooperative.’’ | ,;

47. McCann Tr. 1522 . Lines 23-25. ‘‘arid he found.* * *

| . “2 3 Sgt

48, . McCann Tr. 1523 Lines 5-6. “We just didn’t * * * |

| ee : four.’’ | ees

49. © McCann Tr.1525 Lines 12-15. ‘‘We'tried * * *:sta-

| | tion.’’-

50. Sanford — Tr. 1598 Line 18. “‘I think so.” | @

51. Sanford ‘Tr. 1634 -Liné 18. “I certainly * *,*”” e

52. Zimmerman Tr.1640 Lines 13, 15. “Almost stock * *.*

Yes.’’ |

53. Melton Tr. 1860. Lines 16-22, “That would be***

property.” s

| | ae

> ml JA 57 7

sail ‘Hotion to Strike of Respondent 2 The Seti Company

Witness Transcript ‘Line

54. Melton Tr. 1861 Linés 14-21. “And of course,

‘“@ @@ Products.’ 99

55. Melton * Pr. 1862. Lines 20-22, “If ] we cee

. Firestone. +3

56. Melton _ Tr. 1864 Lines 24 to Tr. 1865; lines 2, 11.

is 7 . _ “Well, I would * * * batteries. $:

07. “Melton - Tr. 1883 Lines ae-18. **A good many “"r*

; 3 cancel]

; 08. Riddick ° Tr.1940 Lines 3-5. “But you’ re larger

Pie. ses with.’’

59. Koehler ~ Tr. 2059 ‘these 16. ‘I did.’’

60.. Goldstein. Tr. 2072 Ljnes 16-20, ‘Tt is very eos.

controlled.’

61. Goldstein Tr. 2079 Lines 20-22; ‘And it mae * 9° ©.

+ be 9 .

62. Price — Tr. 2081 Lines 18-19, ‘They did * * * sta-

| . | 7 Hane” a saa a . :

- (96a) -. - ae, ease.

63. Price Tr, 2083 Lines 7-10. “And they couldn’t

( . : eed ' Gould.”

64. Beott - Tr. 2112“ Lines 13-14, “He hought eee

: , _ Goodrich.”’ 2

* 65. Scott. - Tr2114 Line 13, « That i is right.’’

66. Scott _ Tr.2115 Lines io-11. “And he * * * Tine, "

JA 5S

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

(284) ,

Not Responsive and Evaswe Answers

In many instances the answer of the witness was ‘int

responsive and should, therefore, be stricken. , An exam-

ple of this type of testimony which should be stricken is

that of Dwyer, Tr. 926, lines 23-26:

+Q. What was the name of the dealer you men-

- tioned whose lease was cancelled for nine monthi¥ ,

- “A; Mr, Suffert of Texas Company cancelled that

lease about two years ago *.* *””

‘In certain instances such testimony is also objectionable

in that it contains conclusions or opinions of the witness,

and should be stricken from the record for the additional

reasons set forth in Section IL supra. We shall use the

“symbol ‘‘(C)’’ to indicate instances where the witness has

testified as to his conclusions or opinions and ‘‘(H)’’ where

the answer involved hearsay:

Witness Transcript . thie

. © previously.’’

. (C) Edelson ‘Tr. 787 Line 1-2. ‘‘our Misiness * * *

fe , back.’’

. (C)° Edelson Tr.797- Lines 5-6. ‘‘due to the fact * * *

(H) . : gas—’’ ° }

. {H)’. Dwyer Tr.926 - Lines 25-26. ‘‘Mr. Suffert * *.*

.a5 ‘ ° ago.’’ |

¥ (C). ~ Trancht Tr. 980 Lines 24-25. ‘fro prove some- . :

_— : we

thing ° * * of.’

\: peli

Peden «FA BD

Motion to Strike of Respondent The.Texas Company

Witness Transcript - Line

6. (C) Traucht r.981 ~Line 1. “Whether *** is.”

(H) RED cy ee ae

(285) | ae ~

7. (C) © McCann Tr.1543 ~— Lines 8-9. ‘I don’t know eae:

; items.” | ‘s

ey 8. (C) McCann Tr. 1562 - Lines 24-25. “E really don’t * ede

he did.’?

9. Sinclair Tr.2036 Line 2. “I cold him * * * gta-

, ) ~~ tion.??

10. (C) ‘Avery Tr.2091 Lines 4-5. ““He rie because * * *

| (H) | een.” likes.”” *

" 1L.(C)- Seott

‘ Lines 12-13. “T think - o *<did.”?

ro\

- Witness I ndtcated Lack of K Loni

in. ‘many instances the witness indicated an affirmative ;

lack of knowledge of the subject about which he was testi-

fying, or the testimony of the witness was vague or in-

definite, Such testimony should be stricken. An example

of this type of testimony: which should be stricken, j is that

of « Brusek, Tr. 966, Lines 11-12:

“I would say that. ; That is strictly a guess on my.

part. I have nothing. to substantiate that.’’

The following are other instances of such testimony:

JA 0

Motion to Strike of ee The Texas Company

: Witness “Transcript 5 Dime

.1..*Edelson ‘Tr, 738° ° Lines'11-13. “I aoasiagied =

<< : ee

2. ~ Edelson Tr.738. Lines 15-16. “Yes, ssi: ot?

atte siutth aka Me sears

3, Edelson Tr.762. Lined 9-12 _“L.think * * © foree.” ae

_ 4 Edelson —s Tr. 770 Line 16.°1 doubt it,”? |

_, 5 Edelson’ $= Tr.770 ° Lines 18-19. “Positively T ont

Y : 7 \ : # © © 90,” SS

ats = ® @ @9) . ony 7 Sipe ,

Te Jennings ©‘ Tr.950° ° Line 23° “Several hundred.”

8 Brusek Tr.966 Lines 5-6. ‘‘But-as-a asia _*.*

ge ca : po ee

.* Biesek Tr.966 Lines 11-12. ‘ ue] would nay oad

Re ia a : | ; & is that.”’.

10. ‘“Seidenglanz Tr. 1208 - Lines 9-10. “I “pettaive oe ig

oo : iat _ Firestone.’’ - Bee

-11. Renken Tr: 1245 — Lines 18-19. ‘‘I don’t know * * *

AY a anything.”’

"12." Renken Tr. 1247 Lines 9-10. A, don’t recall. eee

ar metas = 227 S08 Rr ie

: DB. 2 Renken =, 1253 Lines’ 19-20, “Tt would be a ood

es PEE i ea guess *.* * yes.” :

"14. Olsen Tr.1327._. Line 7: “I am not stire * oh sale

15.. Olsen -. Tr.132% Lines 17-18. “I-don’t know * °°

1 hed gure.??) ete

-2@ Sep \.

= La ; yen

rt. ye

~ Ta 6b

"Motions to Strike of Responds T The Pesat Comeamy

Pi Witness . Transcript 2

16. Hansen © ‘Pe, 1398 - . Line 19, “I believe he eh . fag

Rice s + tion”? ;

1%. Hoffman Tr. 1513 - Lanes 6-7. “Lyoulén' know * 4 . .

18. Hoffman Dr. 1513 ae 15-16, Tian a * = aa

2 etsswouat ott eh ia oie |

19, Hoffman ‘Tr, 1515 Lite 7. “I believe *** lessee. oe

20: Boyd vy A 1924. Lines 3-5., ‘I am sure ce ° do.” :

21.. Hulme §- r.1929 Limes 13-14. ‘‘I think it is ** *

tae Vee hp lOO ct te seta git

22. Hulme ‘Tr. 1929 Lines 22-24. “I am under the ~

ae aS ny oe * * © property.’ #

23. Hulme Tr. 1932. Lines . “*T presume * * as

7 Pare “ lieve.’’ rn

24: Bridges ~* Tr-1943 ~. Lines 10-11. “y don’t er eee,

25. Scott Tr.1997. Lines 8-10. “TI. corms cee

° . : ‘. think.”? ae 5 *.

26. Chambers*- Tr.2042° Lines 17-18. “Ng, it would be

; : : 5 e rough e#2¢ percent.’

(288). * | & Sisto.

27. Chambers Tr. 2043 Line 7. ‘‘It was * *“* think.”

28. Goldstein | Tr.2073 “Lines £10. “‘I couldn't answer

wy “© © © gelling.”

29. Avery Tr. 2089 = Line 25.” “Must be. ee bcos

7 | ~~ gand.”?

30. Avery —»s-‘ Tr. 2090 * Line 2° “E tinghi oS 6 tin.’

Tae ir q.?? om

i ies JA 62

Motion te Strike of Respondent The Texas Company.

aoe

| Events Prior to 1952

In sovernl instances the testimony of a wifness related

to events occurring prior to 1952 and should, therefore, be.

stricken. ‘An example of this type of testimony which

should be. stricken is that of McCann, Tr. 1524, lines 22-23: °

’ “That started to dry up in the late 1930’s. By a

it-was greatly reduced.’’: ,

Other instances of Yestimony involving pre-1983 matter

{= ., are:

hundred.”’ .

McCann Tr:1528A. Lines: 13-14 “ft would say ose

: | Sogh VOOR. zs

»- y

_" Witness Transcript ea. ee |

Nelson . Tr. 1216 . Lime 25. ‘In 1949, $889.67." °° ~ |

2. .- Nelson Tr.1217- Lines 4-7. ‘13th and Deer Park .

LS are, ¥ * * * $555.60.” a a

3.° Nelson © -Tr.1217 Lines 13-14. “45th and Lake * * *

& af age. year,’ ott :

4. Zaloudek Tr. 1453—__ Line 1 ~— ea 18..

> 7, through —— She AT < |

FE ~— — ime

5... MeCann Tr. 1526, Tamed: 6-7. “I would say * * * »*

oy CS . them,’ ¢

ao McCann Tr, 1526 Lines 9-22, “Most of the ones —

- ; s ‘ef them.’” : i

7... McCann , , Tr.1527 Lines 9, 11-12. «T didn't | cee

{Jae

Motion ta Strike of Respondent ane Texas Company :

2 Witness’ tp Transcript Line’. i

“9 ‘Talley ‘Tr. 1886 Line 22, through

ae any . Tr, 1889 © Line 19. - |

-10.- Sinclair . 2032 ° | Lines 17- 18"T think the ¢ ante ee

| “ deal.?? .

(290) © is ncrhg

| ; VI.

mi ee Testimony re. Conoco

In many: instances a witness testified aboiit the felation- —

ship between The B. F. Goodrich Company and the Con-

tinental Oil'‘Company (Conoco). Testimony as to the reja-

- tiénship between Goodrich and Conoco is entirely irrelevant

to the i issues in this cama ¢ and should be stricken from 2

° the record. _ .

The record reference to the testimony relating to gach

relationship i is as follows:

$ Witness | . Transcript 4 : Line |

1. °* Carlsen Tr. 615 - Lane 13.

2. Cage. Tr616 —‘ Lime 13-25.

3. Carlsen. Tr. 625 ‘Line 8-22.

4. . Reichert . Tr.686 - Line%.

5. Reichert = ‘Tr. 687 Line 1 through 12

6 Reichert ‘Tr. 688 Lines 23-26,

“+

JA 64

Motion to Strike of Respondent waa a Compnig

| Witness Transcript ©. ~ Line

. 10. ~ Richmond. Tr.645° ‘Line 23 through

Gee Tr,647 - - ‘Bine25.

‘11. ‘Richmond ©: Tr.657 ~~. Line 15.

Fee = cm bt ET Lines 23-26.

(Qty ae | “

~~ Gehrke Tr.708 Lines 2-3.

14, Bdelson Tr. 748 Line 4, through

eee Tr. 749, Line 22.

15. Edelson Tr. 800 Line 16, through ~

: ae Tr. 801 Line 2.

16. Edelson’ Tr. 802 Lines 10-25.

: 17... Abérnathy ~ Tr. 809 Lines 17-23.

| 18. Chanenson Tr. 826 Lines 7-8.

19. | Chanenson _ Tr. 829 | Lines 9-14, 22

- .20. . Chanenson .. Tr. 837 ae ~ Lines 9, through .

| Tr. 839 _ tine 3.

21. __. Chanenson “Tr. 843 "Lines 1-23.”

_ 22, Chanenson: _ , Tr. 856 - Lines 2-16, |

~ 23. O'Keefe Tr. 897 Line 16, through

oe eed Line 11,

2%, Dwyer tm + Tr. 911 “Line 16.

25. Trauscht Tr, 9862 — - Line 3, through |

$ i ee . 5 ; mete”

” * This estimony relates to a sunimary allegedly by the Goodyear

Tire and Rubber Co.

forth the amount of business the witness -

ee ee 1953, 1954 and 1955. a

JA 65.

: ?

= otion to » Strike of Respondent The Texas Company a

- Witness co Transcript ; oe Line’

96. Cramer “Pr. 1048- sine 10.:.

27. Cramer Tr. 1049- Line 16,through .. *

3 es Tr. 1050. Line10. oe,

28, . Cramer , Tr1052. ‘Lines 8-16."

99. Cramer. _. ‘Tr. 1053 Line 18, through :

ee Bp, 1054. Linge

30. | Backencamp Tr, 1065 Line 15, through, rae

| : Tr. 1066 ' Line20. —- Ye

31 Backencamp Tr. 1067. Line 21, through

’ Leas ‘Tr. 1068: Line 5.

32 Backencamp Tr. 1068 ~ Line 19, through |

Tr.1071 : . Line 14

(292) parts 4) te

33. Backencamp -.— Tr. 1072 Lines 19-24. . :

Backencamp Tr: 1088 Lines 17, through

ie os Tr. 1089 ‘Line 20.

- 35. ; O'Mara Tr. 1096 - Line 1-6. - *

ei Tr,1101 Line e 14, y .

37. O”’Mara _ By.1140° “Line 6, through

: | Tr. 1111 Line 3, ee

38, O'Mara, ‘Tr. 1116 Lines 1; 15..

39. we O’Mara a Pr. 1123- Lines 1-9

40. McDaniel Tr.1148 Line 14, —

mae fom Tr. 1162 . Line 10...

41. Nett Tr.1171 Line.2’,siiough. =

ae Tr. 1179 7 nme k ve

Motion to Strike - Respondent The Texas conyeny 7

JA 66

Witness Transcript: me Line.’

43... Seidenglanz Tx. 1197 Line 20, through

ae % Tr.1198 Line21.

44, Seidenglanz § Tr.'1199- ~~ Line’, through

| __- Pr, 1201 Line 4. om

_ Seidenglanz Tr. 1205 Line 17, through .

_— Tr. 1207 Line 10.

46.‘ Renken Tr. 1236 Lines 14-15."

47.. Kossek Te. 1258 Lines 26, through

uae Tr. 1259 Line 9.

48. Kossek Tr. 1262 Line 11, through

f | Tr. 1264 Line 24.

49.: Kossek Tr, 1266 Line 13, through

cae Tr. 1268 Line 13.

50. Cornell / Mr.1975 Line 20, through

; a ‘Tr.1319 , Line 24. |

51. Olsen Tr. 1327 | Line 19, through

: Tr.1337 . Line 8.

(293) : |

52 Olsen ‘Tr, 1348.” ities 20, through

es ses ch _ . Tr. 1349 Line 7. YTS,

. 538. ° Olsen Tr. 1354 Line 20, through.

| 4 i 7 Tr. 1355 Line 6. F

aS a Tr. 1367° Lime 26,” :

_ 55. Kanago,’ Tr, 1382 Line 23.

56,5: Kemago- = ‘Tr.1883 «Line 13-16.

5 i S33; of ta : - .

° oe 3 :

6 \ Mr. ‘< p

Ly 7=,,. ae

_ Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

| Witness Tronscript kine ;

57. Kanago Tr, 1384 Line 26. .

58. - Hansen. Tr, 1403**. Line 4, through

Tr.1405 Line 6. |

59. Hansen , == Tr.1405** __ Line 23, throngh :

it Tr. 1406 line, .

60..° Taylor ‘Tr. 1416%* —_—- Line 23, through ~

ple Tr. 1421 Line 22.

61.” “Taylore — Tr. 1448 Line 25, through

| "1451 + Limel4.

63. Hoffman Tr. 1514 Lines 9-20.

64. MeCann “Tr. 1563 ‘Lines 19,through .

7 Tr.1564.. +‘ Line2.- ;

65. Akin Tr. 1668 , Lines 15-19,

«6. Akin Tr. 1668 Line 26, through

toes : Tr. 1669 — oo): See a be:

>. : :

67.. Smith Tr. 1690 Line 26, through

. ne , _ Tr. 1691 Line 7.

; 68. . Smith | Tr. 1692“ Lime 3-19.

_—~ 69, . Hussong Tr.1711 — Line 8-13. .

70. Barton Tr.1730 . Line10,through“°

; | Tr.1732 = Line 17. - aa

** The testimony related to relations. between Conoco and Fire-

F in| «fF ’ - g ;

stone, neither of which is a

Mg ae “

oF 5 if ‘

ct es

JA 68

Motion to Strike of Respondent The Texas Company

04 | 3 |

" Bahibits That Should be Stricken

A number of Exhibits ‘relating to oil companies that

‘were not respondents in this proceeding were admitted .

over objection. ‘The Hearing Examiner stated (Tr. 636)

that the proper time for a motion to strike by respondents ore

. would be.at the end of the . The following its,

‘ .ineluding Exhibits which are Sumaterial to this procegding,

-Should be stricken. |

7 “Admission

: _ into evidence .

Exhibit No.’ (transcript)

1 ais See

=. *. ORigeererr ~ 350

igs Ox106e* 350A

i . ae el

6st ORM Rae

7 CX109*... . --- - | 852

8 OR ae

9 CXI50A,B = (ss2078Ct

10 ‘CXISIA,B® - |. (1278

oxwpare 1278 .

CX158A, B** 1800.

JA 9 - /

_ Seelam Motion Se of

. The Texas Company:

(Noventber 19, 1957) ~ |

_ (817) re | a L

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -

Buvorz THe Feperat Teape ComMission ..-

Ceo + igahs oa

To THE Hoxonanue ‘East J. Kota, Hascowe ‘Bxaurenn:

. Responildat, ‘The Texas Conlipaniy; by its attornéys filed .

with the Secretary of the Commission, on November ‘8, c

- 1957, a “‘Morié~ ro Srarke’’. Examination. of the record

of the hearings held on November 6th, 7th and 8th, 1957, .

- discloses that cgrtain | additional exhibits and “mapriena!

| “should be Stricken.”

° Wasklotesi Respondent. biked supplements its “Mo-

Tion’’ in the following en gr

(318). gfid |

1. Section VI of the Bpecifeation annexed to the a

’. tion is supplemented by adding thereto the following :

. The following ‘exhibits relate to oil companies that —

are not respondents in this proceeding and which have

no ion to The Texas Company. No employee or

. officer: of The Texas Company has had anything to do

with these exhibits and, on almost all of them,,the ~

‘name, The Texas Company does: not even appear. -

The exhibits have no, probative value,,,Their ad-

mission, and the. basing of any adjudication theréon,

_ would Violate the Rules of the Commission’ #'to’proba- °

tive evidence and the Adminiehnin Procedure : Act

| @.

a 70

"Supplement to Motion to. Strike of The Texas Company

were admitted subject -to a specific hearsay ‘objection.

or & specific objection that the documents were res

and. would dagetve The ‘Texas Company of due process -

NY of law (Tr: 2228-29)...

‘All of the exhibits listed below were admitted. eit-

"Jeet to the foregoing objection.’ In: addition, many

‘inter wlios.acta—the so-called intra-company objection.

' . This Motion to Strike is based upon. all objections

“made. We have indicated those (319) exhibits to

‘which there is the additional hearssiy objection by the

- .. use of the symbol “ (H)’’ and those documents to which

* -. there is the additional intra-company objection ‘‘(I)”’.

| The. follpwing exhibits “— therefore, be etrick-

en:':

fs Admission to

~—_ | | Evidence

‘Echibit No. (Lranscrigt)

‘13. (H) _ &x215 ae

“14. (B) . 02160 2239

15. (H) OX216 sa ;

16. (HY =. Ox2ig. 2234

17. (BH); | OXa9@ 2285

18 (HE) Oa) ACO 2235

19, (HD Oxao =a

90) Oxana@ 2237

|. Sh CH). OKaa80- _ 2938

Bese cey ERAM . 2239

a) Omeo + 30up

AMD os, Cane 4.BP oo BMY

(Relates to Conoco,

JKT ———

2 i me - 7 ;

,) Supplement to Motion is Strike: 5 The Tewas Compory.

3 Admission te ¢

. Evidence |

' (Transcript)

ea omega ga

. (1) F i e 0x232 A, BY a

-(I) | K283 A-D

Oa AS Goes |

(BH) (I), |) Oxas5 ao :

2. (H) (I) 137%, (3 9960" ~ es

: (A) (I) a ae

_ 0239, A-DO * ee

~ OK07 AF a ae

oxn2 A, B® ‘c + 5963 J ( :

. (H) @)

.(H) (I)

30.

34, (H) (I) °

40.

37. (H) (I),

. (H) (1)

. (H)

. (H). (2)

(H) (1)

. (H) (I) -

44, (H) (1)

45.

(H) (1)

as ~ @ Rates to Conoéo,

OXu3®

Oxo

OX2459

- OX2460

,2 377

. ‘

s 2

2263 |

Itt be wt tre §

; (i) —Relates to Conoco. om

Gi) Relates, tp Jenney - Samulactating pNP AN as

= | “Ja 72 Sas

Supplement to Motion to Strike of The Texas Company

Wrst 7 ees

3 Sar _ Admission to

ae , Eahibit No. . er: Transcript )

* 46. (H) (I) _" OX252 A, BO ° 2963

47. (H) o.. i ox2530 2968 °°

48. (H) (I) . - Ox254 2263

49. (H) (I) — OX2550 ~ 2963

50. (H) (I) OX256 A, B® 2268

laa: aS

92. (H) (2) Ox258” 2263

53 (A) (1) CX259R 2263

56. (D260, 2063

8. (O26 » 9263

36. (H) (I). OX2620 2263: ”

57. (H) (I). OX263 A-Z(22) 2264

50. - OK266 A-C® 66

60. OX267 A-C 2967

61. (I) : 0x71” . 2268

em) ORR

| 63. a 2269

(82) : yh eh

ae OX73% ZL. . 9969

| ai) ) Shell American Petroleum tase.

(ANE ota ARE

Supplement to Motion to Strike of The Texas’ Compony : :

: Admiasiots 6

) : ‘. Evidence. -

‘ Exhibit No. | ( Transcript)’

\@ >>: > eee 2270 ~

5. OX77 A, Ro 9971 |

66 = GRT8/A, BO ae

a CX79,A-D® * 2272

67. (I) xs aaa

68. (H) (I) CX8hA-E® = 2274

>» 6. . CX82 A,B” 2274

10. (H) (I) .o OX8BA,BQ 2275

71. (H) (I) CXS A,B .. 2275

72. (I) \ be ABO 2276

73. (H) . Oxs7™ - 2278

) ae ><. EM

CN ee

SL, |. ia RR .

7% 2 KOR ACO 4 2283

(i)—Relates to Conoco. , ey

(iti) Relates to"Shell ‘American - ‘Petroleum Compaay.

( iv)—Immaterial since it refers to consumption purchases which

are not in issue in this proceeding. |

: (v)—Relates, to The Ohio Oil Company. | eee

(vi)—Relates to Emblem Oil, Company. i ME Sk

(vii )—Relates to. oil companies ‘other than resporident. 3

( viii) —Relates to other oil companies and to events — to 1952.

| TA 74

Supplement to Motion to Strike of The Texas Company

(338), ree

o en

Se A : . Admission to

are | Evidence :

Ealubit No. (Transcript)

mee oxis20 - 2284"

| ae Cx1iz6™ 2285

82. CX75 “i 2317

. 2. The Specification attached to the Motion is further.

supplemented by adding thereto the following section =

Testimony Re Other Oil Companies — |

‘The witness Hoban testified, in part, about the re- |

lationship between The B. F. Goodrich Company and.

| other oil companies that are not.respondents in this .. _|

: proceeding: Testimony as to thé relationship betwéen

__. __.. @oodrieh-and euch other companies is entirely irrele-

vant to the issues in this proceeding, is in-no way

‘competent against The Texas Company, and should

ee ee

® : i

(iit) —Relates to Shell American, Petroleum i Chatgaily

_ ee to of Granites other than ca scneraes

JIA.

Supplement to Motion to Strike of The Texas Company |

(324) } ’ |

| The testimony eought-to be stricken is as follows:

% - |. eee Lines 11-15

2. Pr, 2988 Line 6 through

| ! a 2 Line 4 —

a ‘Dr, 2294 Tass Line 16 through

Bane | | | line 20

4, Tr. 2298 Line 2 through ~

_.. Tr, 2300 - Line 20

5. Tr. 2301 Line 14 through

- Pr. 2302 Line 8

- Respectfully sutenitted, |

Marrow J. Ertey, Pee

Dywer, Royal, Hangs, Koror & Caskey ; | .

By ‘Frederick W. P. Lorenses:

Attorneys. for The Texas Company"

Dated: November 18, 1957:

Ce 1 eee

oy “Kr

| Motion to Strike of Respondent

The B. F. Goodrich Company

| _ (December 23, 1957)

(367) :

_ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,,

Brrone THE ‘Feperan Pese CoMMISSION

[Same Tirtz]

To THE HonoraBLe Eri ma Kors, | pinaase Examrven:

Comzs N Ow, réspondent, The B. KF ‘Goodrich Company,

by its attorneys, White & Case, and to the end that the

record herein, for the purposes of submission and. deter-

mination, shall not contain evidence which is not material

and relevant to the issues or is otherwise inadmissible and

evidence which is superfluous.and ynduly enlarges the rec-

/ord, moves that by appropriate order of the Hearing Exam-

__ iner, and for the reasons and on the grounds set forth in the “ay

_ Specification attached hereto, the evidence, heretofore re- ae,

ceived and identified in the Specification (368) attached _

hereto, be stricken from the record.

Respectfully submitted, :

* Teas & Case

By Edgat Sorin

Attorneys for The B. F

Goodrich Company

Dated: December 19, 1957

GE ON:

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich’ Co.

Spgcrrication or Eviwence To Bz Stricken —

*2 - , ,

iH earsay Testimony

The testimony set forth below should be stricken | as

hearsay.

. ‘While the rules of evidence’ in-a proceeding Betote’’ a

quasi-judicial administrative body can be more elastic by.

reason. of the professional abilities of those concerned, it is . .

submitted that the specified testimony below transgresses

the bounds: of such elasticity. It presents a peculiar ad-

declarants often unidéntified, time not established, and

_ place unknown. There are many. instances of subjective iP

interpretations of conversations after-the lapse of im- .

' pressively: long periods of time, and most—if not all—of —

those testifying were basically prejudiced by a fundamental ;

economi¢ interest in the proceedings. The inability to ‘

cross-examine the declarants in alli fairness dictates the

deletion from the record of this testimony, which at. best i

lies on the.outer periphery of credibility.

An example of flagrant abuse of the evidentiary elas-- ..

ticity of an administrative tribunal is the testimony of .‘*:

Richmond (Tr. 655, _ sates Se APF oe

(ere er : : 3 2 ele

: 4¢When you make a hundred salle and they show no

signs of business, and then maybe continue to make "

calls another hundred and still are told from. time to -

time that they.can’t buy your tires, that they have to

buy Goodrich, I think it’ is time to give.up on it.”

JA 78

- Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co. t.

The following evidence. should be stricken:

Line

. aa Witniss Transcript sone,

‘1; Bichmond ‘Tr,654 — Lines 22-23. “‘it was where * * *

, t. us.’ a

2. Richmond ~ Tr.655 Lines 20-6. “When you make

; Far. *@¢¢ on.”

3. Arey °. Tr.688 . Lines 13-19, ““Hle said * * * Good

‘ ik. . ° rich.’’ &

4, * Arey _ Tr. 690 rr 12-13. “The gist _

8.”

5. Chanenson Tr, 832 , Lines 16-18. “No, you can’t* * *

pare flipped.”?

6. Chanenson Tr.832 .. Lines 25-1. “Yes, but *** do.’’

7. Chanenson ‘Tr.836 Lines 25-4. ‘‘He told me * * *.

- 3 e/ - |. | Prospect...

8 Olsen —. ‘Tr.868- Lines 17, 21-22. ‘Because he said

e#¢8 again.’’

9. Olsen 'r.871 Lines 11-15. ‘Frankly, he just

ga ‘ e¢ * sir.’’ P -

10. Dwyer Tr.924. Lines 12-15, ‘The dealer * * *

. - months.’’ | ae aay

11. Dwyer Tr.924 Lines 23-4. ‘‘And Bob told ** * ~:

| : Company.”’ Ren ent

(371). Hist baiiciocg |

12. ° Dwyer. Tr.925 Lines 2426. ‘‘Andy’s Texaco

2 24 + 2¢@¢ Tire.” 99 ;

13. §Shiff Tr. 929 Lines 15-16, «Because they teli

me * * * to”? \

ee FS: ‘

- Motion to Strike of Respondent he Bs F. Goodrich Go.

26.

Witness “Transcript . Line: | Bes:

14. Shiff Tr.931 | Lines ‘2-4. “Peterson: tells tile

° 7 ; . aed * else.’’ : ‘ 2

15. Shiff Tr:931' Lines 12-16. ‘Al Feller * * *

| 7 7) Presteme® ee

16. hiff Tr.936 Lines 7-8. “‘he told me * **

17. ° Jenfings. Tr.953 ‘Lines 6-7. “he told me * *’*

; - é done.’ . . PP o%) ie

18. Jennings’ Tr.956 Lines 17-19, 26-1. “‘He told ame

, . ae #26 in.’? ;

19. Jennings Tr. 958 Lines 17-19. ‘‘and they: told me

2 beet eee

20, Seidenglanz Tr.1196 ‘Lines 15-17. "He told me* **

| . a gown.”’

‘21. Renken Tr. 1243 _ Lines 17-19. “he ket tling*

e " 80.’ 99

22. Renken Tr.1244 Line 3. “By Firestone, he

Line 7. ‘“‘By * * * representa-

. Sl i a

23. Renken Tr.1244 Lines 23-26. “‘He said-° °°.

room.’’

24. Olsen Tr. 1323 Lines’21-22; 26-1. ‘he explained

3 . it*** company. 9

25. Hansen Tr.1397 Lines 22-24. ‘No’ — yoawtas

’ wedineiss Firestone. Me a

(872) | aol! ib,

Taylor Tr. 1413 Liniel 12-13 ; 16-17. ind told: me

ast Nites dA 80 :

Motion to’ Strike of Rpeeniided The B. F. Goodrich Co. %y

Witness Transcript = the: 2

“91. Taylor ‘Tr.1415 Lines 24.25. “He told me * °°

, 1 pre aoa them: oe 24

ee: 28. Taylor. Tr 1416 Lines 7; 13-14. “That he was * °

DEK con yee oie Firestone.” res a eee

| : batteries.’’ :

30. Zimmerman. Tt.1642 Line 4. “He said that °° **?

ge | henilis.””? = se

: aie te room”? |

33. Smith . r.1685 Lines 20-81. ‘He told me*** -

» fe » EE re. 4 _ prod v7 : :

34. ‘Smith Tr. 1692 ° Line 25. “Phat he had to’? * *”

‘ “35. Smith’ = r.1693 Line 5. i elas NOUS ace ,

| | rich,”’ a.

- 36. Smith | Tr. 1693 Line 10. “phat he had to * °°”

37. “Hulme ‘Tr. 1928 Lines 14-16. ‘‘he said that fee

; 7 ; there.”’

38. Hulme f'r.1931 Lines 9-11. ‘he: ‘told me**®*

’ 7 ee as tires.’? —.

- (878) | Ranibigg si

89... Hulme ‘Fr. 1933 -. Lines 24-25. ‘‘he told me * eee g

. _ me. my -.

40. Hulme. Tr. 1936 Lines 22-4. “Hie said * * * you.”

41. Bridges Tr.1944. Lines 6-10. ‘ae T understand ** * a

" people.” bia

° , 5 7

; i ray Bh ieee Preis yp Ooch ass

ees ne : I. a is

a i 6 $A 3. Sp a

Motion to Bit of Rarjndent he B.¥. Gadrich Oo,

“. 42, Bridges "Tr. 1945 Lines 12-15. ‘He, oult,? <e.

them.’’ *

pes eee Ie Rcbie dee Firestone.” .-

44, Bridges Tr.1957 Lines’ 15-16. “Ths wibctligen’ is”.

° : * * * Goodrich.’’ ’ mee

45. . Bridges Ete Tr. 1957 Lines 22-24. “ t he was ees

. aha re business. ”’ a °

46: Sinclair < Tr. 2036 Lines 11-12; “He told me***

° 9 a "5 9A Goodrich.’

47. Sinclair § Tr. 2038 Line 12. ‘‘He ‘said that oe on"

48. Chambers ‘Tr.2049 Lines 24-25. “He just said ***

Pye et hae

49. Price - Tr. 2082 Lines 6-12, ey, teld me t * *

6 ; a ; it.”’

50. Price’| .-'‘Tr2086' Lines 25-1. “That ig would

| 1 Scott “ "Tr 2108~ Lines 6-1. “That he is not * * oe

(374) fae | Be

oe 099°

53... Scott. Tr. 2111 Iaines 9-15. .“*His words ‘es, * ta”

ee ote gt te %:* Som ¥,

54, Scott ss "Tr. 2117 > Lines 19-21. “Often times ore

stock.’ ae

eae

‘ Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

) alain a eon 3 or opinion of the wikis ; such tes-_

- timony has no-probative value and should be deleted from —

the recozd. For example, Chanenson testified a 831,

- lines 1-2):

?. - €e"

“In connection’ with, batteries, certain specific brands

are the only kind that most Texaco statiéns can carry.”’

The following evidence should be stricken:

Witness | Transcript Line

. | 1. Richmond. ‘Tr.653 Lines 89. “it was ‘easier * * *

rite. Sage ee of time.’’ ere ar

2. . Richmond | Tr. 656 .. Lines 7-11. “Tn the last * * *

) " . ; PY 2 . ; nil. “ e : y °

' *3 Richmond _‘ Tr.655 - Lines 20-24. ‘‘When you make |

wot OO OE 99! _"

4. Gehrke: Tr.706 Lines 19, 26 to Tr. 707 line2. “I

eo Hs wo d say * * * you.” ' ‘

(375) ™ ; ‘ole i |

- ss * - - to zhe ‘ : “

5. Gehrke . Tr.707 lines 16-17. ‘‘Before.my time

a & : e288 No.”’ & :

Gehrke Tr.708 Line9. “Ido” §

7. Edelson Tr.739 . lines 11-12. “You see * * * sta--

ne Pe ¥ tion. s ie gies *

8. Edelson § Tr.740 Lines 3,6. ‘‘At the present ** *

little.” -

i JA 88 | | :

see to » Strike of Respondent The B. F. Govdrich Co. ee

noes Witness ‘a vanscript Line~

9. Edelsott Tr.740 - Lines 13, 16, 20-21. “No, rae

of is : , ‘please. ”? |

10- Bdelsoi =r. 740 ‘Line 24. WAR li limited ° °°?

11, Edelson ° Tr.741 Line 5. ‘‘No, we are not able -

rai 7 @ @. 89)

12, Edelson ‘Tr. 741 Limes 11-12, 18. - “We are able.

if ae : *** that” Spell ges

13. Edelson mn Dr, 741 “f Lines 23-24. ‘‘We are limited:

Pees ak | : | * * * basis”? | ~ A tle

a ty ee ae Me et TE: » ee

14. Edelson Tr.746 — Lines 10-11. ‘We are not **

es ‘-. business.’’ +. os .

15. ‘Edelson + Tr. 747, Line 2. . ‘Very much more * * *””

16. Edelson - = Tr. 756 Line 19. “We oould.get.* * *” *

17. Hdelson Tr.757 = Lines 23. “We get *.* **Com-:

: a pany”? ff ls iE cs dS

18. Edelson Tr. 760: Lines 23-24. ‘‘but I have not

ish $a t —_ begn able i * there.’”? _

' (376) |

19. Edelson Tr. 803 Lines 6-11. “When m Texheo* *

, : Tequest. ” ‘ ; \:

20. Abernethy Tr.812 Lines 6, 9. -«“Well, we were RPP

| é Mk there,’’ .

21. Abernethy Tr.813. Lines 3-8. “Well, it has ‘deen fe

- 29. Chanenson. Tr. 827 - Lines 17-20. ‘‘and which is is eee re |

io, or i. prospects.” 5

23. Chanenson . -Tr.827 , . Lines 24-25. “Tires hid

. ae e 4 i sell’? — : Fe AS: ;

JA 84

" Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

24. Chanenson. ‘Tr.828 Lines 1-5. ‘in some instances -

oti +. -s _ ° * us.’

25. Chanenson ‘Tr.828 Lines 7-13,- “They might order _

: , : a at *#** 1”? kb

26.. Chanenson “Tr. 880 Lines 1:12. ‘‘“We have * * *

; ‘i ve ° | item. a. é |

27. Chanenson Tr.831 . Lines 20-21. “What * ee cases. ”

28. Chanenson Tr.835 —_Lines 2-6. “And ¢ * * buying.”

29. O’Keefe ; Tr. 895 Line 22. ‘He owns * * *??

30. . Dwyer “Pp, 906 Lines 19-21, “cy aii eee reg-

. E i ) ularly. 99 | | | :

31. Dwyer Tr. 921 Lines‘25 to Tr.'922, line 2. ‘Be-

Ne? 3 , _ cause he likes * * * judgment.”’ -

(377). : fog te | ae

32. Dwyer Tr.923 Lines 20-24., ‘‘andalsothey*** -

go.’? = g 1 ie

33. Shiff Tr.929 Lines 15-16. diego they tell

- me * * * to,”

34." Shiff Tr.933 Lines 12-16. “No*** that. ”

35. Jennings Tr. 959 Lines 18, 23. “No * * * busi-

eae te - , ness.’”

36. Brusek Tr.967 Lines 17-20. ‘‘In some ‘instances

: . ° ees nature.” ,

37. Brusek Tr.968 . Lines 24-26. -‘‘because that is

38. “‘Brusek * Tr.969 Lines 9-13. “The other* °°)

a = stocked.’ : .

JSA 85

"Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

Witness Transcript Line

39. Brusek r.970.° Lines 7-8. “ecwase i many” oe

ne ?" them.” ;

40. Trauscht _. - 980 Lines 24-1,. “that Liknow:*:* %s ~

: | | ] is. 99 : a

41, Backencamp~ Tr.1073 Lines 3-7. “Because most * * *

| - tires.’? : < =

42, Toft | Tr.1169 .. Lines 10-12, “I would: eopaiiie: |

o * * * figures. ee .

43, Toft - ‘Tr.1179 ~ Lines 25-26. “Yes, we could * ee? s |

SP ne - Conoeo.’? ae

_ 44. Nelson Tr:1213 Lines 13-15, 23, Tr. 1214, Line 6, .

| e ‘We are not * * * companies.”” ~

(378) : mone ore

45. Nelson — Tr.1216 Line 5. ‘* Well; we can’t * * *7?.

46. Renken Tr. 1237. Lines 13-15. ‘‘where there was

- ® "a . * * * otherwise.” . -

47. Kossek | Tr. 1266 Lines 6-7. “in other weeds ORR

hee basis.”? ee

i oes P @ @ 05) ie aes s ;

49. Taylor | Tr.1412 Lines. 1819. ‘But he couldn’t ~

| . eee TRA» : 5 ene oe

50, Zaldudek*° ‘Tr. 1473 Lines 12-13, 16-20. “Thad coe:

aes | | pers cooperative.’ |

51. McCann . Tr. 1522 Lines 23-25, ‘and he found * _—

“a ailage xed it”

— 52, McCann Tr. 1523 Lines 5 5-6. “We just didn’t eee.

four.’?

- JA 86. i.

- Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co. * .

Witness Transcript | Line f

"58, MeCam . r.1525 Lines 1225. ‘We tried * *.°

a “+ station.’’ :

"54. McCann = ‘Tr.1526 Lines 20-22. ‘‘Most-of * * *

rae pee spb eh re ,

55. Sanford . Tr.1598 Line 18. ‘‘I think eo.” 7

56. Sanford Tr. 1634 Line 18, ‘‘Icertainly***” ~~

57. Melton =‘ fFr. 1860 Lines 1622. ‘That would be

: ‘ ‘ - } * property.” ; ~

58. Melton Tr. 1861 Lines 1421. ‘‘And’ of ‘course,

‘ ‘ me be a * * products.’’ ee

(879) oo ee |

| . Firestone.”’ .

60. Melton Tr. 1864 Lines 24 to Tr. 1865 Lines 2, 11.

| Py: ‘Well, I would sae + batteries.’’

61.. Melton Pr: 1883- Lines 12-13. .““A good many * **

Stes : - * gancelled.’”? tae ;

62. Riddick” Tr.1940 Lines 3-5. ‘‘But you’re larger

: ; . Q ae, eee with.’”

63. Goldstein . Tr.2072 Lines 15-19. “‘It is very * * *

ake i BES! foe MMRONMEPT- - .. niys |

64, Goldstein - . Tr.2079 Lines 20-22. “‘And it has *"* *

a ci . . - to.?? ; eight

65. Price Tr, 2081 Lines 18-19. ‘They did * * *

: stationed.” | tas th 7.5

66. Price Tr. 2083 Lines 7-10. ‘‘and they couldn’t —

og JA 87 |

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

~ Witness « Transcript : Liges oe ™®

67. Scott ‘Tr.2112 Lines 13-14. ‘He thought * °°

: ; _ Goodrich.’’ : 7

68. Seott Tr. 2115 Lines 10-11y ‘And he-** * line.” ~~.

_ - , : stock.’’ ar | :

ITZ.

Not Responsive and Evasive Answers

_ In many instances the answer of the witness was not

responsive and should, therefore, be stricken. An exam-

| ple of this.type of testimony which would be stricken is that 2

of Dwyer, Tr. 926, lines 23-26: :

‘*Q. What was the name of the dealer you men-

tioned whose lease was cancelled for. nine months? __-

"fA, Mr. Suffert of Texas Company cancelled that-

lease about two years ago * * *”

In certain instances such testimony is also-objection-_

able in that it contains conclusions or opinions of the wit- -

ness, and should be stricken from the record for the addi- -

tional reasons set forth in Seetion IT supra. <

The following testimony should be stricken:

Witness Transcript - Line

1. Edelson = Tr.744 ~— Lines 4.13. “For'the simple

Bewate7 ~ * * * previously.”

2 Edelson =‘ Tr. 787. Lines 12. “our bubiness.

ee ie <a

8. Edelson Tr.797 Lines 5-6.. “‘due to the fact’

: ‘ : 20 * gas—”? ,

JA 88

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

_ Witness Transcript ~ Line :

4. Dwyer Tr.926 . Lines 25-26. ‘‘Mr. Suffert

a *-* * ago,” ‘

o-_5..._ Trancht Tr.980 Lines 24-1. ‘‘To prove some-

, (iis orseaece : thing * ° * is.”

(381)

6 McCann = Tr.1543_~— Lines 49, ‘“‘T don’t know

7. McCann ‘Tr.1562 Lines 24-25. ‘I really don’t

ae COO! a 7

8.. Sinclair Tr.2036- Line 2. “I sold him*** |

are Magee wtation.*? 5 3

9, Avery § Tr.2091 Lines 4-5. ‘“He does because

os ; * * * likes,” ;

0. - Scott Tr.2105 Lines 12-13. “I think * *

sf 1 w@ Abe did.”’. ,

Iv.

Witness Indicated Lack of Knowledge

. In many instances the witness indicated an affirmative

lack of knowledge of the subject about which he was testi-

fying, or the testimony of the witness was vague or in-

definite. Such testimony should be stricken, An example

of this type of testimony which should be stricken i is that

of Brusek, Tr. 966, Lines 11-12;

“JT would say that. That is strictly a guess ott

_ part. T have pothing : to substantiate that.” |

... The following are other instandii-b- wach testigany : ‘oe

or ; ’ . Cc, .

, ° ,

é - - ? | s - y

‘

re |

5A. 89

' Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

15, Olsen -

Tr. 1327

sure.’’

(882) :

Witness Transcript ~ - Line ;

1. Edelson Tr. 738 Lines 11-13. “I wouldn’t be * * *

meee Conoco.’’ es

2. Edelson =“ Tr, 738 Lines 15-16, “Yes, maybe * * *

, ee |

3. ° Edelson Tr.762 - Lines 9-12. “I think ** * foree.”?

-. Edelson - Tr.770 Line 16. “‘Idoubtit.” aes

0. Edelson § Tr.770. _— Lines 18-19. ‘*Positively I don’t

** & ay ? sae fie

% °

'6. Jennings. Tr. 950 Line 21. ‘I could only guess

oat oe 99 2 2 | a :

Jennings § Tr.950' _-Line-23. ‘Several hundred.”

Brusek Tr. 966 Lines 5-6. ‘‘But as a guess * * *

: | fe volume.”’ : art ae

9. Brusek — Tr. 966 Lines 11-12, ‘‘T would say et °

| : ii

10. Seidenglanz Tr.1208 Lines 9-10. “I believe * * * ig

ir tires Firestone.’?

11. ‘Renken’ Tr.1245 Lines 18-19. “I don’t know *

ane > ae _ anything.”

12. Renken Tr.1247 Lines 9-10. ‘“‘But the ney ees

- é ‘ ; 80. 92 7 °

eet : " guess * * * yo,” :

(383) | | ¥ , | } ve ; . Fe

"14. Olsen Tr. 1327 Line 6. “I am not sure °-* #7?

Lines 17-18. ‘‘I don’t’ know * * ¢

JA 90

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

’ Witness Transcript ~- Lime

16. Hansen Tr.1398 \ Line 19. ‘‘I believe he * * * sta-

a ; tion.’’

17. | Hoffman “P'y,1513 . Lines'6-7. ‘I wouldn't — 7ee

\ ‘leased.””

é ° } into. 99 | .

19.. Hoffman _‘Tr.1515_—_ Line 6. * ‘I believe * * * lessee.”

20.; Boyd Tr.194 ~ Lines 3-5. “Tam sare * * * do.”

Hulme Tr.1929. Lines 13-14. ‘I think it isn0¢

4 impression.”’

22. Hulme ‘Tr. 1929 ‘ Lines 22-24. ‘I sk diate the im-

| rs pression * * * property.”’

23. @Hulme Tr.1932 \Lines 3-4. ‘‘I presume * * * be-

7 } . lieve,”’ ;

24. Bridges Tr.1943 Lines 10-11. ‘‘I don’t know * * *.

| a re ie )

25. Scott Tr.1997° Lines 810. ‘I imagine * * *

oe ; , - think.’’ | : ;

“(yy reniad Mierint

ek : ‘rough ** * percent.” - :

27. Chambers Tr. 2043 Line 7. “It was*** think.”

28. Goldstein . Tr.2073,.. Lines 410. ‘I couldn t answer

; ; . eo ® selling?”

99. Avery Tr. 2069. Line 25. “Mast be * * * thon.

30. “Avery ina’9! “igang €* hom

JA a1

Motion to Strike ed Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

L Fad, Soe %

" Events Prior to 1952

te several instances the testimony of a witness related |

to events occurring prior to 1952 and shonld, therefore, be Be

stricken. An example of this type of testimony which

should be stricken is that of McCann, Tr. 1524, lines 22-23:

‘‘That started to dry up in the late 1930’s, By 1949

it was greatly reduced.” ‘

_ Other instances of testimony involving pre-1952 matter

‘are: — : - ae :

year.”’

Witness Transcript | ey oO, |

1. Nelson. Tr. 1216 Line 25.~‘‘In 1949, $889.67.”

2. Nelson Tr. 1217 Lines 4-7. ‘413th and Deer Park :

_ bal 2 $555. 60. 99

(385) ae 7

‘3. Nelson’ Tr. 1217 Lines 13-14. ‘45th and Lake

* eoe¢ year. 9? ; ;

4 Zaloudek ~ Tr. 1453 Line 1 through

through Line 18,

| Tr. 1465 iy

5. McCann Tr. 1526 Lines 6-7. “I would say***

Bi them.”’

hai eee them.”?

7. -MeCann ‘Tr. 1527 Lines 9, 11-12. “T didn’t coe.

3 . am agi

8.\. McCann Tr.1528-A Lines 13-14, “T would say sed

4 .

JA 2

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

, Testvmony re Firestone

: _ Witness Transcript | fer

9. ~~ Talley Tr. 1886 “Eins 22, through

Jip h Tr. 1912 Line 7. ;

10. Sinclair Tr. 4082‘ -. Lines 17-18. “T think the °°

ie ; f deal.’’ ae

VIL.

In many instances a witness testified about the relation-

ship between The Texas Company and The Firestone Tire

and Rubber Company.’ Testimony /as to the relationship

between Texaco and Firestone is entirely irrelevant to the

issues in this proceeding, and admission thereof would rep-

- resent a deprivation to a respondent of due process of law.

The following references ‘should be stricken from the

‘ record:

| Witness : Transcript Line

1. Wolfe Tr. 81 21-23

2. Wolfe ‘Tr. 83 11-22

3. Wolfe Tr. 89 1-20 -

| 5. “Wolfe Tr. 92 1-51

. 6 - Wolfe ‘Tr. 98 18

1%. ~~ ‘Wolfe Tr. 94-95: 25-17

8 . Dods . Tr. 569 9-10

- 9 Doss Tr.560 6-10

10. Doss Tr.563-664 .23-1 «

’ Motion to Strike

P .

“FA 98.

of Respondent The B, F. Goodrich Co.

Witness Transcript. Line

11. Doss Tr. 565 17-24 ~

12. Doss.” .” ‘Tr. 566-567 1 ie gs

13. - Doss Tr.570571 °° 414 17

14.. ‘Dose Tr..572-573 24-23

16. Doss Tr. 578 23-25.

17. ‘Doss Tr.-579-580 118

18. Doss Tr.581 826 .

19. ~ Doss Tr. 583 615 i

20. Doss Tr. 587-588 18-8 7

21. Doss Tr. 588 1916 *

22. . Doss Tr. 589 7-12

(387) : 7 ya

23. OChanenson Tr. 831 21-23 Je

_%. . Doss Tr. 941 20-22

- 25. Dose Tr. 943 1-7; 12-17;

on | 22-23 ; 25-26."

26. Doss Tr. 944 1-2

27.°°°* Burgess Tr. 1004 4.95

28.° Backencamp Tr. 1060 23-24.

29. Backencamp — Tr. 1062 5-7 ; 10-22

30. Backencamp Tr. 1063 oa

31. Backencamp Tr. 1064 4-5; 11-12;

82... Oramer Tr. 1088 11-15 -

33. Vel.O’Mara. .. Tr: 1099 - 20-24

34. V.L.O'Maera . Tr.1100 4-5 /

‘JA 9

Motion toStrike of Respoiden The B. F. "Goodrich Co.

; Witness cit i Line

35. K.L.0’Mara 2. 1617

' 36. Seidenglanz — 0a...

37. Seidenglanz “17-18

38. -Seidenglanz 17-24.

39, Seidenglanz - 9.13,

40.. - Seidenglanz Tr. 1207 17-20

.41. Seidenglanz Tr. 1208 69

-42, Renken .'- Tr. 1241 1-17

43. ° Renken | "Dr, 1248-1944 8.26

44, | Renken Tr. 1246-1247 21-3

45. Benken Tr. 1247 11-19

46.- Olson” Tr, 1325 1-4; 22-23

47. Olson - | Tr. 1326" 1243

48. . Olson ’ , Tr. 2327 546.

49, -- Qleon | Tr:1329- . ° 4618

50, Scoville Tr, 1358 3-45 13-14

eee ee 22-93

51, Hansen =< "Tr. 1392 _ §-8;18-21

* 52, Hansen “tr, 1398-1304 - 184

_ 53... Hansen 7 5. Me. 1395. 7-9

54. Hansen "Tr. 1396-1397; 25-1; 17-24

\ 55." Hansen: ‘Tr. 1401 * 6-11

56. . Hansen - Tr.1405* . 1018

87. Baylor “Mr. 1409-1410 285; 15-18

58, - Taylor | “Pe MAL. TO

M otion to Strike’ of Respondent en B. F. Goodrich Co.

Witness _ aah i Trenscript v4 Line’:

60. Baylor RMB oR

60.° Taylor: . Tr14J5 .> . 21-95 -

a Bier oe 1420-1421 - 29-12 -

1. 63. Zaloudek «= Tr. 1457 «| 20.25

>| 64, “Waloudek =>‘ Tr. 1458-1459... 19-24

66: ° Zaloudek == ‘Tr. 1463-1464 20-13

67. Zaloudek ==>“ Tr. 1464-1465 23-7

aa _ 68. -Zaloudek° = Tr. 1471 | 90.084

69. (, Zaloudek == Tr. 1472 10-17

| 70... Zaloudek = Tr. 1479-1473 25.5

71. . Zaloudek _ ‘Tr. 1478-1479 - ° 9-12

72. . “Ho ee Sn | >| ae

= Tr.1515-° 84

/ Tr. 1592-1594 4:19

Tr.1596 = ANB

Tr. 1597-1601.. 16-4

Tr.1602-1603 - 9-13

Tr. 1606 21,95

Te,i007 . 34,19. .

Tr.1610 °° 4.95

Tr. 1624-1625 7-4

Tr, 1630-1631 21-23

| JA

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

“Tr. 1934

«~ q ;

. Witness Transcript ° Line

$4. W.E.Gmith Tr168 5-8

_ 86. W.E:Smith Tr. 1692: 93-95 |

88. * Barton ~ ‘Tr. 1725 19-25

89.5 Barton Tr: 1727 815

90. Barton ‘Tr, 1729 ° 5-41; 17-20

91. Roberts Tr. 1759 ee

(300) ee

92. —- Roberts Tr. 1760 ° 25 ;

93: Roberts Tr..1762 13-15 ; 18-22

94. Roberis Tr. 1763 21-22

95.. . Roberts Tr. 1765 a:

96. Roberts . Tr. 1766° - 17-20

97. Roberts Tr. 1767-1770 6-10

98. Talley Tr..1888 16-17

99. ‘Talley Tr.1889 12-24 |

100. ‘Talley Tr. 1890 13-22

101. Talley Tr. 1892 4-9; 21-25

102, Talley . Tr. 1894-1895 14-7.

108. — Boyd Tr. 1923-1924 23-4

104. Hulme | _ Tr.1928 20-21

105.' * Hulme _ Br. 1929 8-10

106. Hulme Tr. 1931 8-11

107. ~ Hulme Tr: 1933 | 20-25

‘Hulme "45-18

| JA 97

Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co.

Witness iat Transcript . Line

109. Hulme ‘Tr. 1936-1937 «166

110. Hulme Tr.1937_ 15-21

111. ° Bridges Tr. 1945 7-15

113... Bridges Tr. 1947 18-24

114. °° Bridges Tr. 1957. 18-24

115... Bridges Tr. 1958 5-7

(391) eS .. ie.

116. Gaiase Tr. 1962-1965 . 17-14

117. Tidwell Tr, 1972-1973 19-21

118. _. Tidwell Tr. 1975. - 14-26

119. Tidwell Tr. 1981 13-14

120. Tidwell Tr. 1982-1983 18-17

122, — Gilbert Tr. 2029 3-5.

123, - Sinclair Tr. 2084 -15

124. Price _ Tr, 2082 12°

125, . Price Tr. 2083 ie

126. Price .,’ ‘Tr. 2086 7-9; 18-19

127. Avery Tr. 2090 22-23 sputck

128. Avery Tr. 2092 23-24.

129. Avery "Tr, 2094 10-15

130. .) Avery Tr. 2095 58 -

131: * Seott Tr. 2106 18-22

132. Glenn Tr. 2137-2188 . 225

133.° Bartlett. Tr, 2182-2187

| JA 98 |

' Motion to Strike of Respondent. The B. F. Goodrich Co. ee

A Witness Transcript Line

134. ‘Bartlett * .- ‘Tr. 2187-2188 , (1015 -

135. Halsell- . Tr. 2195-2196' 89

136. Halsell |= Tr. 2196-2204 214°

137. ° Wolfe - Tr. 2207-2210 19-9

"138. "-Wolfe | ‘Tr. 2210-2211 18-28

139. Wolfe _ Ty, 2213 4-19

- (392) ae

' 140.. Wolfe Dr, 2214-2215 «18-25 |

| Exhibits re Firestone

| The following exhibits relate to The Firestone Tire and

Rubber Company, which is not a respondent in this pro-

ceeding and which has no relation to The B. F. Goodrich.

Company.’ No employee or officer of The B. F. Goodrich

Company has had anything to do with these exhibits and,

on almost all of them, the name The B. F. Goodrich Com-— -

pany does not even appear. |

The exhibits have no probative | ils their admission,

and the basing of any decision thereon, would violate the

Rules of the Commission as to probative evidence and the

Administrative Procedure Act and would deprive The B. F.

Goodrich Company of due process of law (Tr. 2228-29).

All of the exhibits listed below were admitted subject to —

the foregoing objection. In addition, many were admitted |

subject to a specific hearsay objection or a specific objection ~

that the documents were res inter alias acta—the so-called

intra-company objection. This Motion to Strike ‘is —

upon all objections made.

ars ae exhibits should be oxickens

; : . . _ : ; : :

sce "JA 99

| Motion to Strike of Respondent The B. F. Goodrich Co. os

"waif : tt )

Admission to

Exhibit Number - (Transcript) -

‘. OX 113 A-Z-52 - 2141

3. oxut s

4. CX119 — 9147 ee

5. Ox 121 2149

7. ox22 2187

8. CX 203 — a ks ay:

9. CX24A-F | ne 2?

10. CX20;AF -. ~ 2160

oe “Ox207A-F ~~ _-2160

8%. - . oreesr. 2160

14. OxasB | 8

5. CX46EJ ee

6: ene. 2196

“17 . OX43.. a a

18 x4 2216 -

| 19 OX 234 K-L. 2248

JA 100

Order Shui of Motions to Strike Certain

Testimony. and Exhibits Filed by the Respondents:

; (J anuary 2, 1958)

(413) ny ees :

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

‘Berore FEpera Trape ComMIssion

Docket No. 6485

[Same Trriz]

This proceeding is before the hearing examiner on |

Motion to Strike, Supplement to Motion to Strike, and ~

Memorandum in Support of Motion to Strike, filed by the

_ respondent The Texas Company; answer thereto, filed by |

counsel supporting the complaint; and Reply Memorandum

pany ; and also upon Motion to Strike and Memorandum

_ in Sypport of Motion to Strike filed by the respondent |

- The B. F. Goodrich Company.

_ ‘The -specifications contained in the motions to trike

may be divided into the following categories:

a Hearsay testimony.

2. Testimony purporting to oti siiiiatinaie and opin- oy

ions.

~ Be on-resporisive and evasive answers.

tung where a witness indicated limited knowl-

edge: -

5 Testimony relative to events prior to 1952

JA 101

Order Disposing: of Motions to Strike Certain

-. Pestumony and Exhibits Filed by the Respondents — "ig ARs

(414). : ; shih sea gs

6. Testimony relating to other oil ccbipncis ‘whieh

had been received subject to motion to he al

The Texas. Company.

= Testimony relating to The Goodyear Tire &. Bab- |

y which has been received subject to mo- —

tion to strike’ by, The, B, F. Goodrich Gomepeny: .

.* H earsay. isligsoas -The hearsay testimony con-

tained.in the specifications in the motions to strike. involve

testimony by competitor suppliers, who testified as :to the

reasons given by station operators for not purchasing ‘such |

suppliers’ merchandise. At the time this testiniony wae

offered, the hearing exarfiiner overruled the objections —

_- based upon hearsay on the basis that such testimony came

_ within the exceptions to the hearsay rule, and that such .

testimony could properly be received not as proof of the . -

matters contained in said reasons, but only to show the

state of mind or motives of the gas station operators.

The record shows that the respondent The B. F'. Good-

rich Company entered into agreements with the. respondent

The Texas Company and other oil companies by the terms .

of which contracts The B. F. Goodrich Company agreed

' to pay The Texas Company and other oil companies an

override commission on all merchandise sold to stations

under contract with The Texas Company and other oil com-

panies on consideration that said oil companies. promote

the sale of Goodrich TBA products to said stations. This |

evidence, coupled with further evidence as to the, gontrol

which The Texas Company and other oil companies main- _

"tained over their stations by reason ¢ of their contracts with -—

such stations, made material to the issues in this proceed- Bs

rt ;

JA 102

- Order Dispdiing of Motions to Strike Certoin

Testimony and Exhibits Filed by the Respondents

ing the attitude or state of miind of the station operators

with reference to purchasing TBA products competitive

to those sold by respondent. The B. F'.:Goodrich Company.

In view of this, the hearing examiner received this testi-

mony solely as proof of the attitude or the state of mind

of the station operators, and repeatedly stated on the rec-

ord that the evidence was not received as proof of the state-

ments testified to.

As a legal basis for (disies rulings) tipon evidence, refer-

ence is made to the case of Lawler v. Loewe, 235 U. S.

522, 536. In this case, salesmen testified as to the reasons

given them by dealers for not purchasing Loewe hats. Jus-

tice Holmes in writing the decision stated :

(415) ‘‘The reason given by customers for é ceasing to

‘deal with sellers of the Loewe Hats, including letters

from dealers to Loewe & Co., were admissible.’’

Justice’ Ne cea farther clarified this holding of the

Court in his opinion in Ruckeye Powder Company vs. E. I...

DuPont de Nemours Powder Company, et al. 248’ U.S. 55,

_ 65, December 9, 1918, in which he stated: ioe

‘Several exceptions were taken to the exclusion of |

-statements:by third peréons of their reagons for re-

fusing or ceasing to do business with the plaintiff. We

should be slow to overthrow a judgment on the ground

“sof either the exclusion or admission of such statements

| except in a very strong case. But the exclision in this

instance was proper. The statement was wanted not

as evidence of the motives of the speakers but as evi-

detive of the facts. recited as furnishing the motives.

Lawler ve. Loewe, 235 U. 8. 522, 536;.Elmer_vs, Fes-

sendem, 151 Massachusetts, 3859, , 362,” pl

JA‘103

Order Disposing of Motions to Strike Certain

. Testimony and Exhibits Filed by the Respondents

Subsequent thereto the Circuit Court of Appeals in the

Second Circuit in the matter of Greater New. York Lwe

Poultry Chamber of Commerce vs. United States, 47 ¥.

_ similar situation stated as follows: prieot aitial im *

“<A number of the assignments of error relate to the

admission over objection of the testimony of witnesses

for the prosecution.as to reasons given ‘by receivers

for their refusal to sell to recalcitrant marketmien. -

Such statements of reasons, though hearsay, are ‘ad-

missible to prove the state of mind of the declarant

if that be in issue. * * * They are not admissible, how-.

ever, to prove the truth of. the facts recited as ex-

planation of the state of mind of the declarant. * °° —

In the case at bar the reasons for the refusals to sel!

were a material issue, since the government sought

to show them related ‘to the conspiracy and the de-

fendants claimed that the true reasons were entirely

_ different. The appellants would have been entitled to |

_. an instruction limiting the. probative force of the evi-

dence to tliat iesue—more specifically, warning the

the truth of the matters asserted therein. But, since

the appellants did not ask for such an. (416) in-

struction; but attempted rather’ to exclude the evi- .-

dence entirely, they cannot now claim error in its ad-

mission.”’ :

_ 4

In view of the above, the hearing examiner is of the

opinion that there is a legally sound basis for his rulings

upon the so-called hearsay_testimony, and that no basis

hae been presented in said motions for disturbing or re-

JA 104

. Order Disposing of Motions. to Strike Certain

Testimony and Exhibits Filed by the Respondents

2. Conclusions and Opinions: The specifications un-

‘der th

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.